tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 30, 2014 10:00pm-12:01am EDT
with the virus. and it is only spread through oddly fluids. eightcubation period is 10 days from exposure. it can be as short as two days or as long as 21 days. disease, which has a high mortality rate, even with the best of care, but there are tried and true interventions that stop it. today, we are providing the individual that traveling from liberia has been diagnosed with ebola in the united states. ons individual left liberia the 19th of september, arrived in the u.s. on the 20th of september, had no symptoms when departing liberia or entering this country, but four or five days later, around the 24th of september, began to develop symptoms.
temper,6th of said initially sought care, and sunday, the 28th of september was admitted to a hospital in texas and placed in isolation. we received in our laboratory today specimens from the individual on the tested them, and they tested positive for ebola. of texas also operates a laboratory that found the same results. for ebola is highly accurate. it is a pcr test of blood. so what does this mean? the next steps are basically threefold. first, to care for the patient, and we will be hearing from the hospital shortly to provide the most effective care possible, as safely as possible, to keep to an absolute minimum the likelihood or possibility that anyone would become infected, and second, to maximize the
chances that the patient might recover. identified all people who might have had contact with the patient while he could have been infectious, and, remember, ebola does not spread from someone who is not infectious. it does not find -- spread from someone who does not have fever or other symptoms, so it is only someone who is sick with ebola who can spread the disease. once those contacts are all identified, they are all for 21d -- monitored days after exposure to see if they develop fever. if they develop fever, then the same criteria are used to isolate them and make sure they are cared for as well as possible so that they maximize their chances and to minimize or eliminate the chance that they would infect other people.
the bottom line here is that i have no doubt that we will control this importation or this case of ebola so that it does not spread widely in this country. it is certainly possible that someone who had contact with this individual, a family member or other individual, could develop ebola in the coming weeks, but there is no doubt in my mind that we will stop it here. it does reflect the ongoing spread of ebola in liberia and west africa, where there are large numbers of cases, and while we do not currently know how this individual became infected, they undoubtedly had close contact with someone who was sick with ebola or who had died from it. africa, we are surging the response, not only at cdc, where we already have more than 130 people in the field, but also throughout the u.s. government.
the president has leaned forward to make sure we are working very proactively there, and the defense department is on the ground, already strengthening response. we are working with usaid and other parts of the government as well as with a broad, global coalition to confront the epidemic there, but ultimately, we are all connected by the air we breathe, and we are invested in ensuring that the disease is controlled in africa and also ensuring that where there are patients in this country who become ill, they are immediately isolated, and we try to do it through tried and true preventions that stop the spread of ebola. dr. frieden. secondto introduce our speaker, with the texas health
services. >> thank you, dr., for your support, and the support of the cdc as we work through this current situation. as i start off, i want to say our thoughts and prayers are with the family and the patient and the treatment team for this individual. our laboratory, the public health laboratory, we have a specially trained team to handle things like this. we were certified on august 20 22 do ebola testing. at 9:00 this morning, we received a sample. all of the controls were within pcrexpected ranges, and the was definitely positive for ebola, and we got that back at 1:20 two this afternoon. i want to state that we have no other suspected cases in the state at this time. however, we are closely
monitoring the situation and are ready to assist. we have been insignificant andact with the hospital with the cdc, and they have our full support as we work through this situation, and we are committed to keeping texas safe. healthto thank the department, the cdc, the county, and we are working through the situation together. thank you. >> thank you, dr.. our third speaker is the hospital epidemiologist with the texas health presbyterian hospital-dallas. dr.? >> thank you. thank you, doctors, the cdc. i want to correct one statement that may have been frieden.reted by dr. transferred through
the air. it is not an airborne contagion. we have a robust infection control system that works in close cooperation with the dallas county health department, the centers for disease control, as well as other epidemiologists within the system and within the community. we have had a plan in place for some time now in the event of a possibleresenting with ebola. ironically enough, in the week before this patient presented, we had a meeting of all of the stakeholders that might be involved in the care of such a patient, and because of that, we were well-prepared prepared to deal with this crisis. thank you. >> thank you, dr. goodman. is the dallasker county health and human services director, zack three thompson. director thompson?
>> that afternoon. our hearts and prayers go out to the family, as well. i want to thank the doctors, the cdc, as well as texas health presbyterian and others who are responding to this case in dallas county. i also want to commend our medical director and the team for the work they have been doing in conducting public health follow-up on the patient, which includes contact investigation to gather information based on the patient's travel history, activities, and close contact. county health and human services will proceed with the public health follow-up her cdc dallas countyd health and human services want dallas county residents to be reassured that your public health is our number one priority. dallas county health and human services staff will continue to work hard to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of dallas county. thank you. >> thank you, director thompson. we will now take questions. dr. frieden?
startnk you, and we will with the phone and go to the room. thank you for that comment, dr. goodman. as emphasized, ebola only spreads via direct contact. it does not spread by any other router that we have seen in any outbreak. i also want to thank texas and dallas county health departments for their collaboration. cdc has a team of epidemiologists going to texas now at the request of the texas department of health, and we work hand in hand collaboratively to do what public-health does best, which is protect people, and we protect people in this case by making sure that we find the contacts, identify them, and make sure they are traced every day for 21 days, and if they
develop a fever that they are immediately isolated, and then their context would be, as well. so first question, in the room. >> you said he started first showing symptoms, went to a hospital, and then was released, sent home, and then was not admitted until a day or two later? >> so the initial symptoms of ebola are often nonspecific, which means they are symptoms which can be associated with many other symptoms, so it may not be immediately identified as ebola, and that is why we have encouraged all emergency department personnel to take a history involving travel and then to do a rapid test. dr. goodman, is there anything you would like to add to that? >> no, i think you summarized it very well. >> next question. >> i know you are limited a bit with patient privacy, but tell us a little bit. was this person involved in
fighting the evil epidemic, and also, did they travel on a commercial aircraft? >> from the information that we have now, it does not appear that the individual was involved in the response to ebola, but that is something that we will investigate more. in terms of the airline flight, i really do want to emphasize the focus here over the next ,eriod needs to be the patient and we are very focused on trying to get any assistance we can to the patient, who we understand is critically ill at this point, and then identifying contacts within the community, family members or others, and then any possible contacts through the health-care setting, and then tracing those contacts. in terms of the flight, i understand that people are curious about that and wonder about that, but, remember, ebola does not read before someone
gets sick, and he did not get sick until after your days after he got off the airplane, so we do not believe there is any risk to anyone who was on the flight at that time. he left on the 19th and arrived on the 20th. next question in the room? how likely is this going to continue to be a concern, for people who are showing symptoms then and that may leave, and what is being done at the airports for the first lines of people coming into the country to make sure this does not continue to be an issue? >> as long as there continue to be cases in west africa, the reality is that patient's travel. in the rituals travel. and as appears to happen in this case, individuals may travel before they have any symptoms. one of the things that cdc has done in liberia, sierra leone, ginny -- ginea, if
they have a fever, they are pulled out of the line, assess for ebola, and they do not fly ruled out. is the airlines have to keep flying, but that does not rule out a situation where this person was exposed and then came in while they were incubating the disease but not infectious with it. >> from abc. can you tell us where he was, and do you know why he was in those countries? >> the details of the individual are things that we will investigate, and some of that has to be with patient confidentiality, so we would defer to the hospital and the family for any information on those details. and we have a question here, and then shall we go to the phone for the first question after this one? >> nbc news.
you expect the patient to remain in texas and be treated there or to go to a facility such as emirates or others around country that have been treating them in the past? >> so one of the things that we really do want to emphasize is that virtually any hospital in the country that can do isolation can do isolation for ebola. in fact, over the past decade, even though this is the first ebola patient in this country, we have had five patients with other forms of very deadly viruses, which are called viral -- evenge or erratic though they were not promptly diagnosed because it was such an unusual situation, so we do not see a need from either a medical or an infection control standpoint to try to move the patient. dr. goodman, is there anything more that you would like to say? >> no, i think that summarizes it very well. >> the question on the phone.
lee's dress star one and give your name. the first question is from cnn. your line is open. >> thank you for taking the call could and you tell us a little more about how sick the patient is, how the patient is being treated, and how many contacts you are trying to reach? for theht be sending folks in texas. and also, will this patient be staying at the hospital in dallas? >> let me turn first to dr. goodman for any information you can share about the patient's status and treatment? >> because of the patient privacy, we are not able to share any information about the patient's symptoms or treatment at this time. iscan say that he is ill and being treated by highly competent specialists, and the health department is helping us in tracing any family members that might have been exposed.
>> and, director thompson, do you want to say something further about contacts? doing theff is public-health follow-ups since day one, and we will continue to and we will have more details in days to come, but right now, everything is going fine. thank you. >> as we mentioned, we have a team on the way to texas right now, and they will work hand-in-hand with state and local and hospital and public health and epidemiological staff to identify possible contacts and then monitor them for 21 days to see if they have a fever. this is core public health, and this is what we do in public health, and we are happy to be doing it in coordination with texas, and we are hoping for his quick recovery. phone.t question on the >> the next question comes from the wall street journal. your line is open.
>> i am wondering if i can ask for a little more detail about potential exposures. is there anything that any of you can say more about what this patient was doing between the 24th, when he had symptoms, and when he was admitted? i mean, was he just at home, and so only family members were exposed, or how many people? are we talking about a handful of people who were potentially exposed or more than that? is the rightndful characterization. we know there are several family members, and there may have been won or two or three other community members, and we are there to do additional investigation to identify any other possibilities. our approach in this kind of case is to cast the net widely to make sure we are identifying even people who may not have had direct contact so that we are safety.n the side of
mr. thompson, is there anything else he would like to add? >> our role is to look at suspected cases, and we appreciate your sending your cdc team down to support us in this effort. wethink it is a small framed are looking at in terms of the number of people we are looking at, and we will report to the public. >> and i will repeat that this is a tried and true photo call. this is what we do as a protocol for a variety of infectious diseases, and this is what we do at the cdc globally. and today, we released our weekly bulletin, and there was a report of the nigeria investigation, where a single patient came in, and unlike this, that individual was not cared for with infection control and resulted in a number of secondary cases, but even with 19 secondary cases, they appear to have been able to stop the outbreak.
i have no doubt that we will stop this in its tracks in the u.s., but i also have no doubt that as long as the outbreak continues in africa, we need to be on our guard. other questions in the room? >> from wxaa. can you give us a number or the scale of the team from the cdc? are there doctors that are going to be in a hospital? are these going to be people who are actually fanning out into the community? can you give us more information on that? >> i can get back to you but the exact size of the team. we provide epidemiologists and two indications experts and hospital infection control and library -- and experts as needed, and every cdc staff or the 130 in africa, they are tied tightly to our experts here who provide backup 24/7.
we defer to the local and state health departments, and they are there on the ground. they are the lead, and we are there to support. in the room? on the phone? comes from question hp. your line is open. >> thank you. saye know -- can you even if this is an american, or is this a visitor? and have they reached any of those contacts yet? >> what i can say is that the individual was here to visit family who live in this country. think, are tos, i be identified in the coming days , and relative in -- relevant or not, we will see. in terms of content -- contact tracing, we have just gone.
we are already forward leaning on this, so we are locating individuals so that can begin immediately. on the phone? >> the next question comes from maggie fox. i know you have been extremely clear that people do not spread this virus unless they are showing symptoms. nonetheless, i think everybody ofws that the reaction everyone in the united states has been disbelieving of this, so i wonder what steps you might take to assure people who think they may have traveled with this patient or passed through the same airport with this person that they are not at threat? >> people can always call us at cdc-info. they can also check on the website. the flight in question was a specific flight departing by buri on the 19th and arriving in the u.s. on the 20th, and that would be a small number of people who would have that level
of concern, but really, i think it is important that we understand a lot about ebola. ebola is a virus. it is a virus that is easy to kill i washing your hands. it is easy to stop by using gloves and barrier precautions. the issue is not that evil is highly infectious. the issue with ebola is that the stakes are so high, and that is why at the hospital in texas, they are taking all of the burr cautions they need to take to protect health care workers who are caring for this individual. -- taking all of the precautions they need to take to protect health care workers who are caring for this individual. initial phases of illness when they have got a fever, the most sensitive test in the world sometimes do not detect it, because there is so little virus that they have. it is only that they become sick or that they become more infectious, and patients died
from ebola, they can have very large quantities of ebola's there, so there is no risk having contact with somebody who has either recovered from ebola -- i have gone to the region myself and embraced people who had ebola, or to be in contact with people who have been exposed to ebola and who are not yet sick. >> your line is open. >> thank you. i know you cannot give many details about the patient, but i just want to confirm that this is a male, and if there is any other information you can give, and i am wondering, is this the first-ever case in the united states, and if not, was there one previous case? is the first patient diagnosed outside of africa, to our knowledge, with this particular strain of ebola, and as i mentioned earlier, we have had other patients with
hemorrhagic fever, including a patient in 2007 with marburg, which is a virus that is quite a bit like ebola, and that person was hospitalized, went through surgery before being diagnosed, and it did not result in the spread to any other individual, so this is the first case of ebola diagnosed in the u.s., and as far as we understand, of this strain of ebola outside of africa. have referred to the patient in the best way that we can so far. next question. >> bloomberg news. your line is open. >> hi. i wonder if you can tell us more about the contact tracing process and how that is done and how you can make sure you have reached all of the people that that person was in contact with. >> contact tracing is a core public health function, and we
do it by a very systematic manner. we interview the patient, if that is possible. we interviewed every family member. the identify all possible names. we outline all of the movements that could have occurred from the time of possible onset of symptoms until isolation. then in a cascading manner, we identify every other individual who can add to that individual, and with that, we put together a map, essentially that identifies the time, the place, the level of the contact, and then we use a concentric circle approach to identify those contacts who might have had the highest risk of exposure, those who have an intermediate risk, and those who may possibly have had exposure, even though we think that may be unlikely, and we always err on the side of identifying and tracking more contacts than less, and i mentioned that with 20 cases, we at cdc and elsewhere are working with nigerian authorities to identify
nearly 900 contacts and monitored all of them everyday for 21 days. in senegal, we also identified a single patient who came in and had exposures at two different health care facilities and in the community. we monitored more than 60 contacts every day, and none of them became ill, and this kind of contact tracing really is core public health, and it is what we do day in and day out and what we will be doing here to identify any possible spread and to ensure that they are not further chains of transmission. on the phone? two more questions. >> the next question is from reuters. your line is open. >> i have got two questions. the timeline. my understanding is the patient arrived in the united states on the 20th, initially sought treatment on the 25th. came back again on the
28th of september and was admitted. will you be offering this patient any convalescent sera or experimental sera? >> you are time -- correct about the timeline. as far as experimental therapies, that is something that is being discussed right now with the hospital and with the family and, if appropriate, would be provided to the extent possible. on the phone. >> the new york times. your phone is open. >> x very much. i think people have touched on this, but i would like to touch on this also just in case we can't get any more clarity on it. can you tell us if this person is an american citizen? will you be releasing the flight information, and is it correct to assume that he was staying at a home with family members rather than in a hotel?
visitingtient was family members and staying with family members who live in this country. we will contact anyone who we think has any likelihood of having had an exposure to the individual while they were infectious. does notoint, that include anyone who might have traveled with him because he was not infectious at that time, and you asked a third question, which i don't remember. >> i asked if he was an american citizen. >> he is visiting family who live in this country. do we have any other questions in the room? will you identify the flight information? >> we will identify any contacts where we think there is a risk of transmission. at this point, there is zero risk of transmission on the flight. the illness of ebola would not have gone on for 10 days before diagnosis.
he was checked for fever before getting on the flight, and there is no reason to think that anyone on the flight that he was on would be at risk. i want to end with just a bottom line before we stop. disease because of the severity of illness it causes, and we are really hoping for the recovery of this individual. at the same time, we are stopping it in its tracks in this country. we can do that because of two things. strong health-care infection control that stops the spread of publicnd strong core health functions that trace context, track contacts, isolate them if they have any symptoms, and stop the chain of transmission. we are stopping this in its tracks. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] a marinee hearing on
who was detained in mexico after being found carrying firearms. that is live tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. here are just a few of the comments we have recently received from our viewers. >> i am a c-span viewer. say that whento you allow the republican on, youtatives to go need to be more demanding of honesty and not demagoguery. they don't address the issues. they demagogue. they filibustered. and i wish that you guys would say to them, senator or er askedman, the call you a specific question. would you please answer it? >> my call is a suggestion.
i would like to see the c-span line,g call-in have a especially when there is a representative on, that that line be set up for the people that represents his district so that they might be able to call in directory to that person and ask questions, so i thought that would be a good idea and a good way for the representatives to be accountable, to hear from their constituents. when you have them on, let them be questioned by their constituents. >> i think that c-span is a great show, but i think when you have a republican on or a democrat, it should be both, so therefore one side would not just be saying one thing. we need another side. with a republican on, we need a democrat onto counter where they are saying so the american people can make their own decision. i think it is a disservice when you put a democrat on and let
him see you what he wants to spew and then put a republican on and vice versa. why can't we have a format like that? i think that will be much better for the american people. >> and continue to let us know what you think about the programs. 66-3400 or202 -- e-mail us. join the c-span conversation, follow us on twitter. >> next, a united nations special coordinator talks about some of the challenges in trying to eliminate the syrian chemical weapons program. torch 10 university hosted this 50-minute event. ♪
>> i am here in my foreign service capacity, and the assad regime launched a large-scale chemical weapons attack on a rebel held suburb of damascus, killing more than 1000 individuals, including hundreds of children. chemical weapons had been used previously by the regime, or, at least, there were allegations of the effect -- to the effects, this marked an escalation of the regime's brutality, and it set in motion a series of events, including the prospect of a potential american strike on syrian facilities, that culminated in the 2013 agreement brokered by the russians, where syria would let their chemical weapons under international control and dismantle them, and in exchange, the u.s. would not strike serious.
in the course of about nine stockpiles syrian were transferred out of the country, and most, i don't believe quite all yet, have been destroyed, but they are all out of the country, as far as we know. with more of the u.s. or international response to those events, i think the elimination of syrian weapons of mass destruction and chemical weapons stockpile is a good thing. it leaves the region safer than it was before, but the line between that august 21 day when the chemical weapons attack happened and today was not a straight line, nor do i think is the story fully understood, and that is what tonight's event is about, getting a better understanding about these important events, and i can't think of no one better in the entire world, frankly, to tell us this story than our speaker tonight, the special coordinator for the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons
and u.n. joint mission to eliminate syrian chemical weapons. in other words, she is the person in charge of making this happen. position,ssuming this she was a veteran diplomat with a range of experience, but most recently including as undptary-general at the and then prior to that as a regional director at unicef in amman, jordan. so i am pleased that you are here. welcome to georgetown. we look forward to your remarks. we should have plenty of time for question and answer. of the eventrt will wrap up at 6:00,, at which time you can join us outside therefore a reception. so without further a do. [applause]
you, simon, and thank for what i think will be an exciting conversation both ways. in my dreams, i would never have thought i would be here speaking at georgetown on this endeavor, a huge international effort, a unique one, unprecedented for many reasons, and i hope to specify that a little bit and talk about when made it unique, what were the challenges, and also what may be the takeaways, including multi-nationalism for the international community and what may be good examples that merit replication elsewhere as to address significant challenges, be it was security, development, be it a humanitarian crisis. it is also the day today, september 30, that it will close. the assignment has 36 hours to close.
i fade away at midnight. and i will get started. as you know, the story of serious when it comes to chemical weapons, it is about disarmament with a country at war. at the same time, the tragedy continues unabated with. millions of people are displaced. people fall every day, and it affects security. tore are tremendous threats peace and security. the international community had to make choices. you may recall, as simon just referenced, in the run-up, in reaction to the violation of the norm, chemical weapons had been used, with the victims on our tv
screens, it led to a flurry of activity, diplomatic engagement, and particularly so by the united states as well as by the russian federation. it also proved and produced the framework agreement, the famous framework agreement that encouraged and asked serious to become a member of the conventions. obviously, that all happened in the space of a few weeks time. with syria becoming a part to the convention, the following steps were taken. the area produced a declaration. it declared for the first time what it considered to be its chemical weapons program, which was always assumed by the intelligence community to be quite significant and quite large and to pose a significant threat to the region and to the civilians of the region. arethese, of course, assumptions. in syria, a declaration was made, all of the patronage of
the russian-american framework agreement, but, of course, a declaration in a state party almost overnight with the threat of a military intervention still over its head all -- also ask for a constructive implementation plan by the international community. this is where i would not say out of theere but hague, where the convention is based, as well as security anders, a plan was made, the u.n., as you know, has buttiations on disarmament, we have never dealt with chemical weapons like this before. there was another normal custodian.
so they were asked to merge and to provide assistance and to provide monitoring, be in syria the community to drive this process. now, driving the process is something you have often heard of and is often spoken of. driving the process, so to speak, was working our way back. i believe everybody would say it was a very ambitious deadline, a near impossible deadline. the the syrians realize deadline, they said it could not be done, and it is one of those moments where you realize him a my goodness, and i am sure, your thisnts, you have made
decision, but we did not think it through, and we may be frozen do not know and we the complexity of the task in hand and the near possibility of achieving something that is an international requirement, that is an issue of compliance, and that is a matter for chapter seven under the security council alsoution 2118, which guided our effort. there was tremendous media speculation and ongoing clinical developments. what was asked of us as a joint mission? we went to damascus. i was actually appointed in the middle of october. from myof you know biography, i was certainly not selected for any prior knowledge thehemical weapons or science.
the instruction was that failure and that wetion, would go where we have not gone before. and one person was working at another u.n. agency looked and who do i know can come with me and help me open this mission question mark who can i trust with finance? who speaks the language? who do i know that can negotiate? and how can we help the inspectors, who have not necessarily worked under these conditions of crisis and active conflict? how can we build a team together? i joined one week later, and we realized that all of us knows
something, and hopefully together we know everything that is required, and what we don't know, we would just have to put our faith in either ourselves, themember states, tremendous support from the security council, and work constructively, continuously, and a very transparent manner and our syria counterparts, that helped us to succeed. we were working as one. i believed in this. this is where you had to demonstrate we are the boys, the channel, the means of the international community. we don't have time and cannot afford to scribble over little issues amongst ourselves.
we are here to serve. thewe are here to serve steering people, those who suffered, and also for the very important political process and to create a bigger space for the humanitarian track. now, how did it happen? we had three phases in our work. was to identify every site on the basis of the syrian declaration where chemical weapons were held. where the delivery systems were held, mobile labs, rockets, production facilities, research facility, you name it. a chemical weapons program is complicated. our inspectors went side by side and gave each a number for phone
shall destruction, and what it means is i break this pen, and it is broken, but it is not totally broken. the first step, to render inoperable, not fully destroyed, but to render inoperable all of the aspects of the syrian chemical weapons program. the second phase is the one you hear most of in the media. i would not say it was the trickiest one but one of the most interesting and daunting ones. a discussion took place about how we can destroy the syrian chemical weapons material. prime time example, i will give you mustard gas. normally, they would be destroyed on soil. times of war is not necessarily the time to implement the chemical weapons. usedear is that it can be
again or that it would fall in the wrong hands. was determined that all the materials should leave the country as soon as possible and to get a sense of comfort and confidence to the international community that it is out of reach, cannot be used again. what had to happen therefore is that we had to pack and repack material, and get it out of the country. and then others that needed to give their soil for destruction. that clearly proved not to be very popular with the people in those countries, and there were concerns from the environmental community, so the u.s. came up with the solution, let's destroy the chemical materials at sea, on ship, specially equipped for
that purpose. however, between getting it away from sites to the port, the vessels that were designated, particularly by denmark and norway for the purpose of just transport of the chemical italy, material, in where they had made their port available to go back with the containers aboard a u.s. ship, you can imagine we had a phenomenal just in time, >> supply operation in hand. sometimes i felt in this role, and i am sure on one hand we were engaged with high-level diplomacy, troubleshooting, negotiations that were not necessarily easy, and at the same time, we were in the business of getting the coca-cola bottles from a to b to case for destruction, so it was a matter of reverse engineering a very, >> operation, and called on a lot of parties, and also asked for group toand the other
work for the first time with a maritime hat on. to that effect, we had worked -- work with cyprus. this was where we can work with maritime partners, and this has been one of the unique facets. we had a unique alliance of fleet.tremendous the people's republic of china, vessel,federation, u.s. united kingdom, and denmark and norway, and, of course, the engaged in were all the maritime component part, and at the same time, inside syria, we were worried about trucks, negotiating with the syrian security, how they would guarantee the safety and security, when the routes were safe, when there was an imminent danger, how we would assess
that, and always thinking of the clock, the clock, the clock. it is taking. reverse engineering, when you deal with the operations peace and security, chapter seven suddenly takes on a very, very different meaning, and i think that is also what rendered this differenttremendously and unprecedented, but as i was just mentioning to my colleague who served with me in damascus all this time, i have been to this one area a number of occasions, and it is a wonderful seaport and a resort also in syria, as a tourist, but this time when we woke up from our hotel room, what we saw was the fleet, the people's republic of china, russian federation on the horizon, and normally as you think as a tourist, the sun is up, we are happy, and are happy moment would be when we would see these ships come, because we would know that the next shipment was about to leave the country, so it was one ship
gone, one more step towards progress, and one point that has been achieved. the challenges? i will come back, because i do not want to make it all sound so easy, and i do not want to make it sound like it was all one big easy ride. the biggest challenge and concern always was security. the risk and threat, the tremendously volatile security conditions in country, where no one is safe. i had to state that the syrian authorities always extended their utmost, and is the duty of the state party or host government, to provide as much protection or security for all of those who serve there, but a country at war, wrong place, wrong time obviously can be fatal, and for myself as head of mission, my biggest worry was always staff safety and security. that also meant that some message we did not undertake. we used technology. tracking.
we sent cameras if we could not go to a site. when we were not sure we could go or were not sure if we could come back, which shape or form, so technology played a tremendous role, but personally, i am delighted and very relieved, i suppose is the appropriate word, that we are managing to conclude this mission a few hours from now without any of our staff members having been seriously injured or hurt. they have all carried tremendous stress, have undertaken personally huge risks, and we were one team, and they have all done this with a single objective to render syria a little bit safer, to deal with disarmament, and you really at least deal with chemical weapons elimination, as it was so important. it is never enough. but it has been a tremendous contribution by each and every one of them.
now, what was feasible, what was different from other operations that i know. if you take this out of the realm of chemical weapons or disarmament, what was a big factor of success was the continued unity of purpose and voice of the un security council. a number of you, and i know you are in the school of foreign service, you're all interested in international affairs, or you are students of international affairs or petitioners. you know that this is not always a given. this is something we had to sustain through our own red ability, but it is also something that was clearly a choice. this was throughout the ukraine crisis and throughout many in the regions, and that is quite unique. equally so, member states put their resources and assets where they were needed. this is one of the few, i think, u.n. operations, in particular,
that was not short of funding. this was never the question, and i am looking at a colleague of mine in the audience. often, we are not in this privileged position, so it was interesting indication to me, as well, of the importance. resources. technology. the fleet. other information. whatever was required, it was provided. oath in a multilateral setting and through the joint mission but also bilaterally, and the chinese -- people's republic of china invited assets also bilaterally to the syrian, as did the russian federation, whatever was required for the success, at least to do as much and diplomacyne was a key component of this in two ways. on the one hand, we did troubleshooting. we particularly also invested a
lot of time talking to the regional actors. and there was the agreement reached. this would be leading to another state of play, and in touring -- according to their analysis, it wasn't sufficient. so we have tried to leverage as much as possible and within our mandate the knowledge, the political positions, and also the access and context that these member states would have, be it influence, or we would ask
them to use their influence over any party to the conflict in syria to assure that this mission would be supported, that we could conduct our work in a safe and secure manner what that ultimately, the operation could be concluded in a safe and secure manner. i justurity council, mentioned, proved to be a unique experience, but only for myself but the fact that the council remains united, and we asked for monthly briefings. month by month, a report was submitted. it was reviewed. council members, despite all of their other priorities and the competing pressures of other, parallel crises, council members that time, prepared, asked questions, probes, and this was a tremendously important clinical not only message, a form of support, but also a form for political accountability, or we would also have to explain how we assess progress that is ultimately the accountability of the state party, syria.
media, it look at the is always hard to assess that yourselves, but we made a comment from the beginning. rather, fromision, the beginning to maintain a low profile in the media. for two reasons. on the one hand, it may be very tempting to be interviewed or sort of to be spoken of in the media rather the work of the mission, but we felt it was only relevant for us when we had something to share, something to rectify, at times, and we did not want our work -- we did not want to be part of a debate. we wanted the work to speak for itself, progress or lack of progress, and looking back, i always feel this has been tremendously helpful. it allowed us to work closely in damascus with our counterparts, with whom he had a constructive cooperation until now. it allowed us to address and look at problems from a security perspective, operational or technical, to look at them in a
bym manner and not be driven rick opinions out there, so we built ourselves a bit of a buffer of time. we also felt it was very important to be out there when we speak with evidence when we are fact-based, and that was a choice made both in our presentations, out reach, and engagement, and i like to think it also reinforced a sense of credibility, and it gave an element of trust in the work of the joint mission. we don't, as you can imagine, if you look back at how the joint mission was established, the ask, the timelines, the unique sets of partners that were all committed as members of the international community, and working with a country at war. -- continuousuing balancing act that we need to understand, including being aware of the mistakes that we
may have made in the process, but the visibility side was not high on our agenda. we tried to manage visibility only for the purposes of direction of travel, progress, or explain why things had not happened in the way that they were anticipated, so what are the factors for success, and then i will wrap up, and i look forward to hearing from you based on your operations or perceptions on developments in the region. member states support. it is almost a precondition. the ties and the continuous feedback between the executive council and the hague and the security council in new york. i also believe that a technical agencies such as opcw and the u.n.,olitical arm of the we have been able to demonstrate that this can work harmoniously, effectively, and also in a time bound and results organized manner. , the of diplomacy
multilateralism i just noted. now, what is a good practice for future missions? i do not believe you can replicate this model at all times or for all themes and issues, but what has been helpful, and i think there is nothing that is the same when you prepare for an exam, there is nothing like having a deadline. the measurability. the partnership that was built. some countries provided money. others provided stuff. others provided access to just gave, and others political support, but if i go back to the example of italy or cyprus, cyprus basically gave us space in its country to work from, to deploy from, to do the thinking. a maritime component. entirely managed from cyprus. gave a porch. we could not have done the loading from one ship to the next for the destruction without that port. critical.
so each country provided an example. lebanon was immensely helpful in ongoing facilitation of goods, travel, trucks, you name it. basic, butds fairly if you have a blockage, if you have got a delay, if you have got issues at custom, or entire deadline is just slipping for the sake of something that when you looking back, it was a unique set of circumstances. the wars continuing. being -- iss d deepening. we can be relieved to that the components have been destroyed. a are working to address number of issues that pertain to syria upon declaration -- syria's declaration. i will speak more with you in a questionnaire and -- question
and answer session. would we be able to do it again? today, that window is not the same as last year. on the one hand, it was a unique moment. the operation averted the threat of military operation. the armor meant. would we be able to do it again today? i will leave that is a question. changing and the threats are increasing. the international community needs to have better means to address crises. have the rapid response management and mitigation capacity to a dress those problems. we can solve them and build and provide building blocks for a better future.
our work, and my intent and that has been to make syria somewhat safer. do what we can for the people of syria and the region. political process inclusive. the humanitarian and recovery tracks will be there to get people back on track. too many victims, too much suffering. thank you. [applause] >> that was great. i will take the moderators prerogative and ask that the first question is actually two questions. iran the middle east office. 2011, we actually had quite a
robust planning exercise. it was all related to chemical issues. an extraordinarily challenging time in terms of issues. knowing where all the key facilities were. there's another phrase you here nothe military, which is plan survives first contact with reality. you cannot under appreciate how they were it was that able to do what they did and do it on time. do work onors cannot my house on time. the fact that international organizations could is remarkable. you mentioned that the syrian military did a good job of theing you safe, shuttling
colleagues around. two questions about the regime. you saw some of the access that occurred with saddam hussein. did you have much foot dragging from the regime? what was the cooperation like? thehe good news story is chemical weapons have been destroyed. but thing know how to build these things. the knowledge cannot be dismantled. someonfident are you that of the steps you took would prevent the regime from -- >> you are absolutely right.
for dragging is a term that was often used. instances, went had what we thought was a satisfactory expiration because we were there. orderf it was technical requirements based. being in the right place at the right time. beentart would not have feasible. we also had a number of issues that for security reasons, we had come up with even more ingenious solutions. developed armored jackets. bulletproof. designed in a haphazard fashion to protect the trucks that
transported the chemical weapons out of syria. that caused a part of a delay. other areas were a matter of negotiation. indicated they were not willing to start the operation if they did not have their security assets in place. a number of them were dual use. we had to be categorical about it. not -- we use the trust funds to procure it. you want it, you are accountable. windown the bilateral the russian federation was willing to provide assets. choices had to be made. some of the delays required constant dialogue and discussion in damascus.
very helpful conversation with the russian federation. ,e had more than once a week three-part calls. this was sustained at the peak of the ukraine crisis. had a level of instinctive understanding that the authorities had declared. they wanted to see progress. you are operating in the context of war with another party's factoring and what their priorities work. when it comes to your question , how doe declaration you assess intent, i would be a fool to speculate every country eliminated or almost
eliminated. a number of countries are continuing their destruction, verification. case is oncey, the you have the intellectual capacity, you have knowledge. it is of interest, given that everything was declared and destroyed was labeled, that is a question for politicians to make a calculation. the big question of their remains the ongoing discussion on the declaration. discrepancies -- that need to be addressed. and the regional mix. it is important to underline that any violation of the international norm of chemical weapons prohibition, almost 200,000 people have died by conventional and other means. there are a thousand ways of
dying. we see that in syria. >> certainly true. it up to you.en we have about 20 minutes. there is someone with a microphone. if you are interested in asking question, raise your hand. question from the audience? sir? >please speak into the microphone. otherwise, it will not be captured on camera. >> good to know. >> tried again. -- try it again. thank you for your remarks and thank you for coming to georgetown. i'm a second your security student. -- year security student.
i have questions about negotiations with the other partners in the middle east, particularly iran. and what kind of issues were brought up. how exactly you went about solving these. i'm interested in the issue. >> it is a very good question. i wouldn't say issues brought up -- i would say there are three areas of interest. one of them is iran played an initialole on its declaration. from its ownn, experience, provided advisers that went to damascus and trained people on dealing with mitigation. medical doctors. if and when another attack were to occur.
the third area is one i would say of the medic engagement, where athe hague, number of the initial decisions where he ranhed -- -- iran was one of the negotiators. its proximity and close ties to an authorities were additional channel for us to validate, verify, and also express concerns. or say, we are not seen much happening nowadays. what is your take? constructiveer of collaboration. tousing on that one goal, focus on the illumination of the chemical weapons program. just to provide a little
context for those of you who may be don't follow these things as closely, iran is important in this context because they are not only syria's prince will ally in the region -- prince principle ally in the region, they have also been the principal actor. that puts them on the bad side of the ledger. on the other side, they were victimized by the use of chemical weapons in the iran-iraq war. traumatic experience on the iranians. it was seared into their memory. because they were used against iranian troops and cities. it put them in an awkward position. the position of the iranian government is against iranian --
chemical weapons. other questions? ma'am? >> hi. thank you for coming. i'm a student at the college. in one of your previous conferences, you mentioned that productiontill 12 facilities. have these been destroyed or are they still going to be destroyed? >> that was a hot topic. used the terms tunnels and hangars because when i productionerm facilities, i thought of factories. it will be done by april next year. .ll things being equal >> another question? in the back?
>> i am a first year student. regimetion is, did the give you any guarantee of the destruction of the chemical weapons that could have been in anor eventually placed opposition controlled area? >> if i understand your question correctly, what we know is there was one site in a contested area. completely in accessible from the outset. ,hat has always been considered by the international community.
considered abandoned. that site has not been visited. it will become a in due course, if that situation changes and conditions change. there are no concerns at present over that site. decisions had to be made to extract the material, even though we could not get it to aleppo. the site was about to be overrun. from't know if you recall the media, in may ended june, there was tremendous pressure and a waiting game. deceive the deadline could be made -- to see if the deadline could be made. it was holding up the start of the chemical weapons distraction process. at one stage, there were so much fighting in one area the
authorities had difficulty to have access, to extracted the material. it was no longer clear what to do. this was confirmed by key member states. in the end, they had to take the risk, extract the material, and it is a good thing they did. you had a fairly toxic mix of different chemicals used. if you have that, you can start something nasty. had -- not had that. in other areas, we used technology and video cameras. there is a very detailed process. a checklist of what you have to do and when it is valid. how you do it. a very elaborate process of verification and monitoring. >> this is an important benefit of dismantling the weapons. the battlefield in syria is
fluid. agreementence of an to get the weapons out, there is the possibility the facilities could be overrun. that is the reason that pentagon engaged in detailed planning in 2011. not so much a fear they would eapons on a large scale as they would fall into the hands of jihadists. ,t was a nightmare situation you didn't want to see the weapons falling into the hands the wrong hands. the plans required thousands and thousands of troops. it was a big deal. a hand from a gentleman in the back? that since syria is now a signatory, they will require inspection in the future.
what are the plans going forward? how the inspections will take place in future situations where weapons may be uncovered? >> i'm not 100% sure if there is a detailed plan. going forward. they are in the midst of wrapping up the discussion. making sure the tunnels and hangars get destroyed. looking forward, not knowing how the situation will evolve, it is not hard to see you will -- how you will have a detailed verification. unless you can see that through, other state parties -- you need to keep a question mark. even though syria has become a
member, it is not like any other state party. for now, it is under review of the security council. and the executive council remains -- and that sense, if maybe 30 days. it is an issue of concern. >> other questions? right over here. >> good evening. i'm a recent graduate. my question involves two events. the decision making calculus. this came as quite a surprise. i'm wondering if this an example of successful negotiations behind the line? >> why did he do what he did? >> i will give you the
appropriate answer. mixed bag of a deterrence, pressure, and time sensitive diplomacy. decisions have to be made. this is geopolitics. the terrorist factor, with the opportunity through diplomacy that you can have something that can be achieved, with an expectation and a time mandate, there's something in it for most of the politicians to say there is a way out. i think future historians will have to sort out what the motivations were and what role iran played behind the scenes. how seriously they took the u.s. military threat and what alter your motives.
i don't think we have the answers to this question. but we know the answer to one important question. whatever one thought about the wisdom of of using military force at that time, in late august work early september, it would not have destroyed the chemical weapons to the degree that the diplomatic outcome did. whether we should or should not have taken action, that is an important question. if you are focused on the chemical weapons issue per se, it is indisputable that what they did had a exponentially effect than had they launched 50 tomahawk missiles. other questions? rehear? >> -- rate here? -- right here? >> i wonder if you can address the ongoing use of chlorine test and why that was not addressed before.
>> i will give you a process question that is kind of important. and then where we are now. there have been a series of allegations of the use of chlorine gas as a weapon of war. it was decided in the hague that a fact-finding mission would be sent. i represent the joint mission, the elimination of syria up a stick cleared -- syria's declared program. chlorine is not covered. mission wasnding sent. it faced difficulties. there was a time issue. it takes time to do this. you have to make sure your methodology is appropriate. you have the right steps in the right team. they could not access parts of the country to interview victims and gather further data. they tried.
there was a serious incident. the fact finding mission was fortunate that nobody was injured let alone killed. they continued their work. there was a report where they stated chlorine gas has been used. they have not stated by whom. report interviewed victims in turkey. the conclusions are strong. it has not drawn a final conclusion. it is expected to continue its work. it is a tragedy that we keep hearing about the use of chlorine gas which has continued. that is a dilemma for the international community. the report is one thing. but for the victims, it is nothing at the end of the day. >> we have time for one final remaining question. i want everybody to
offer another round of applause to our guest. for all the hold work the organization -- that only for joining us but for all the hard work your organization has done. thank you. [applause] the real reason you came is for the free food and beverages. >> it's ok. it is a good reason. thank you. few of the just a comments we have recently received from our viewers. say thatly want to when you allow the republican representatives or senators, you have to be more demanding of honesty and not demagoguery. not press the
issues. the filibuster. -- they filibuster. i wish you would say to them, would you please answer the specific question? >> my comment is a suggestion. c-span have to see a line set up especially for when there is a representative on, it be set up for the people -- in that district. so they are able to call and directly to the person and ask questions. i thought that would be a good idea and a good way for the representatives to be accountable. to hear from their constituents. on, let them -- >> i think c-span is a great
show. when you have a republican or democrat on, it should be both. we need another side. we need a republican on and a democrat on. would becan people able to make their own decision. it is a disservice when you put a democrat on and let him spew what ever he wants to spew, and then a republican later. would belike that better for the american people. >> continue to let us know what you think about the programs. call us. e-mail us. or you can send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. the governorta, faces a challenge from jeff jessen -- johnson.
we will have life debate coverage. here are some of the ads running in that race. things in minnesota were not going very well a few years ago. we got a new coach. he made the tough decisions. now things are looking up. we have added more than 150,000 new jobs. we have one of the fastest growing economies in the nation. cut taxes well increasing the rainy day fund. darn good record, right? darn good coach. >> i am jeff johnson. as governor, i will audit every program and i am pretty thorough. >> let's just double check that. did you eat this? mark dayton should be hold
accountable for wasting our money. he is out of touch with middle-class minnesotans. it is time for a governor who gets it and gets us. >> jeff johnson for governor. a team ofof -- extraordinary candidates has stepped forward. meet hannah. general.s attorney as -- they are the independents. coming november 4 to a state capital near you. prepared and paid for by the independent committee. coverage continues wednesday night on c-span. live coverage of the debate. night at 8:00 eastern
on c-span. oklahomarage of the debate. also on thursday at 8:00 on c-span2. the nebraska governor's debate between democrat and republican. live coverage of the montana u.s. house debate the between john lewis and ryan's ink -- ryan zinke. when than 100 debates for the control of congress -- and more than 100 debates for the control of congress. up next, sarah palin campaigned with pat roberts. this was held in independence, kansas. >> i am absolutely delighted to get to be here. and the senator and i were out there and we just got in our first real argument. i'm telling him how happy i am to be here.
we are proud of him and the great work he's done all these years and he's going to keep doing not just for kansas but for the rest of america. he said, you know, you're in third. we were going back and forth. he is a conservative and he is what america needs. i know i'm supposed to be -- i'm talking about all of america. i'm talking about the need to have fighters there in the senate who will fight like our country's future depends on it, because it does. and we have a senator right here who is tried, tested and true. and bleeding that purple too -- [applause] no question where he stands.
i am so thankful that he proved that a year ago today and last night. he is one of the few senators fulfilling campaign promises, doing what the american people asked him to do, standing there on the floor with senator ted cruz to do what they could to get rid of obamacare, fulfilling -- [applause] i am loving that he's not wishy-washy in the sense, like you know who, the other guy. i am so thankful because we need those that are just fine with the principles that are so convicted within them that they will -- senator cruz and senator mike lee, they said i might get
clobbered for what i'm going to do. i'm sure that was going through my mind. welcome to my world if you think you're going to get clobbered by the press. he did it anyway because he was doing the right thing. once a marine, always a marine. [applause] my son said never say that again in public. it's really good to be in kansas or as barack obama would say flyover country. you're growing our food, you're helping feed america. you're sending good young folks to the united states military to fight for your independence.
it's here that you're raising children with a strong work ethic, and it's here where you can re-elect someone who will fight for the freedom to make sure that that work ethic is rewarded. that's what built this most wonderful, most exceptional country was that expectation of reward for hard work. when i think of kansas, that's what i think of. i think of hard work and farmers. i think of those who have for so long they worked as a community united, especially in tough times. our country is going through tough times and now is the time that we need to be united. the primary is over. it's time to get it together and, kansas, we're counting on you to get it together and making sure the independents, those who are not registered in
either party, that they understand that if you want someone with principles and values, those virtues, if you want that, you don't have to be stuck with someone who is wishy-washy, but you've got that person there already in the senate. for unity effort, for the reason of unity, knowing that united we'll stand. in the next 41 days make sure you make the right decision. we need to be united. he will help do that. here in independents, i know a little bit about kind of going rogue.
i do. and my -- in fact my husband, i never convinced him to register for the republican party. he's independent. he said i don't want to get involved in a lot of machinery. our governor piper, her middle name is indie, i-n-d-i-e. it means something grand and something important. the independent spirit that has to translate into something tangible when you're talking politics. you can't just claim as greg orman to be able to not pick a side and still be effective. that defies common sense. you know what it's going to take for america to be saved and that
is that republican party be strong there for you. so with that, our good senator here who is -- he's pro-life, pro-guns. i'm very proud to be with him. [applause] he's on the right side of the issues for america and for our independence. again, as for his opponent, i know independents and anybody with a liberal record like him, supporting obamacare, supporting amnesty, supporting harry reid, that's not independent, that's someone who is trying to fool
kansas into thinking that he could have it both ways. no, it doesn't work that way in politics, in d.c. especially. your senator knows what he's doing. we need him back there. we thank him for his service to our country. [applause] he is the right man for kansas and for america. so with that, let's hear from senator pat roberts and we are so extremely proud to be here and i know kansas will do the right thing and send you back to d.c. for all of us. thank you. [applause] >> thank you.
i just told the governor i think i'm going to read this speech again and it will be all right. but at any rate, governor, we are going to bottle you. that message needs to be sent loud and clear all throughout this election. if you could just show a little more enthusiasm. [laughter] thank you all for coming out. thank you for taking time out of your schedule to come and listen to a true grassroots courageous republican. [applause] the governor is extremely courageous because she says what's on our hearts and minds. and when we talk to one another in our living rooms, at home, in meetings, with personal friends,
it's always how come our country is on the wrong direction, how come we're leading from behind and getting into all these problems, how come we have an $18 trillion debt, how come obamacare is raising our premiums and the doctor-patient relationship is in danger, how come we are allowing people to come across our border during a time when we have crisis with terrorists that are threatening us? our intelligence shows us they've made many, many threats. how come we are now worried this country that we honor, we cherish, we love is now in danger? may not be the country for our kids and grandkids. that is the biggest issue because we worry about the yolk of big government, more spending, more regulations. i had one farmer tell me i don't feel government, i feel rural.
governor, i offer to you the statement that people are losing faith in our government. that's a terrible thing. it's an egregious thing and we need to turn it around because our government does not have faith in us. that's really what this is all about. that's what president obama is all about. government knows best. i got to tell you, folks, not on my watch. that's not going to stand. [applause] the reason the governor is here is that the republican party is united. [applause] every square inch of the republican party knows what's at stake. we have to take the senate back as a first step to turning our
country around, to kansas values as opposed to what's going on in washington. [applause] there is only one person on the ballot that will go to washington and kick harry reid out as opposed to giving him a stamp of approval and change the direction of the country with the united states senate in republican hands so we can come back to the constitution, come back to the foundation of our country that made our country great, celebrate hard work, celebrate kansas and what we're all about here in the greatest state of the nation. that's what we're going to do. that is why the governor is here, pardon me, mama grizzly is here. [applause]
have you ever seen a mama grizzly dressed as a wildcat? [laughter] you wouldn't be able to kick a field goal. [laughter] sorry about that. we're all sorry about that. [laughter] i make a promise to you. i have fought for you before. i have fought in virtually every issue that you care about with regards to agriculture. we can get into crop insurance and policies and everybody back there would just phase out. i know what you do. i know what you do, you are producers. you're hard workers. we produce the food for our country in a very troubled and hungry world. show me a nation that cannot feed itself and you have utter chaos. that's what we're all about. it's pretty damn important.
i will be in the trenches fighting for you. i will support your conservative values. i will never give up. marines take the hill. i will take the hill and win. [applause] my opponent greg orman says he's an independent. well, goodness knows everybody likes to be independent once in a while, but you're not an independent if you give thousands of dollars to barrack obama, hillary clinton and, yes, harry reid. you're not an independent -- wait on it. you're not an independent when you run against me in 2008 as a democrat, ok? he is not an independent. he will be a stamp of approval for harry reid and a continuation of the obama agenda. that's not going to happen. [applause]
winston churchill said the kites fly highest in the strongest of winds. there are a lot of winds blowing, contrary to our best interest in the world and in this country. we are going to change that around. i promise you. thank you so much for coming. let's go to work each and every one of you. every phone call you make, every bumper sticker you put on, every sign you put on, you're part of a wave to better this country. god bless. semper fi. [applause] one other thing as the person who crawled through the barbed wire fence -- that's a terrible joke.
we are going to -- let's go have some. all right, thank you. [applause] >> nebraska congressmen debated challenger.ic here's a portion of that debate. 2020.dsight is had we left troops on the borders with syria, we could have maintained some training mission and a support mission on the border with syria, theoretically, in and around baghdad and other parts of iraq. that train has left the station. i don't see us coming back in to
iraq with that kind of force now or in the future. >> mr. terry? --i agree that twang hindsight is 2020. the foreign policy of the is to not help with the establishment of the government. pulling military people out to quickly so they were not trained. when the government started punishing segments of the society, and they left to join isil, we should have been more involved. if we had, we might not have had isil. i support the president on his strikes. i think that is the right thing to do. we have to do what is in our national security interest. we have to make sure the government and their military -- they are the ones. i perceived the germans arming the kurds -- i appreciate the
germans arming the kurds. i think the boots on the ground should remain iraqi boots. >> you voted against arming the syrian rebels. only person who voted against them. that was to army free syrian army and train them. i think there are too many incidents where we trained a group of people and then they train their weapons on us. syria is one of the places where it is difficult to find -- just because they are fighting a sod does not mean they are friends -- fighting assad does not mean they are our friends. >> you agree? >> it is impossible for me to know. briefed i don't
know about the intricacies of that decision. i don't understand this. maybe my opponent can explain this. how congress could have left washington after four days and had a vote on training syrian moderate rebels without a thorough discussion or debate about where that was going to go. i think those questions need to be asked. the authority needs to be asked and debated. i would say, stay in washington, debate for a couple of days. there was only four days of meeting after the recess. i think it should have been debated over the weekend. >> mr. terry, a chance to respond? >> the process was, the president asked for congress to
make the authority. he wanted it. we had a deadline because of the continuing resolution. that is the answer. >> on the next washington journal, ron kessler discusses recent security briefings -- breaches and what the secret service should be doing to protect the first family. and then the 2014 primary season. after that, laurie abraham talks about heer interview with justice ginsburg. washington journal's live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. debatecampaign 2014 coverage continues wednesday night at 8:00. live coverage of the minnesota governor's debate.
between democratic candidate, andblican candidate, independent candidate. live coverage of the oklahoma governor's debate. p.m.,n thursday, it 8:00 on c-span2, the nebraska governor's debate. at 8:00 p.m.night eastern, live coverage of the montana debate. 2014. campaign more than 100 debates for the control of congress. >> earlier this month, a man injured theence and white house before being stopped. that man, omar gonzalez, was indicted tuesday. the head of the secret service incident about that and other breaches at the white
>> the committee will come to order. the oversight committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. first, americans have a right to know the money washington takes from them is well spent, and second, americans deserve an efficient government that works for them. our duty is to protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to
hold government accountable to tax payers. solemn responsibilio hold government accountable to tack payers. it is our job to work tirelessly with citizens of watchdogs to bring general reform to the bureaucracy. this is our mission in today's hearing follows one of the most important parts of the measure. with one point $5 billion spent by the secret service, nearly a oflion spent on protection first family, second family, former presidents and presidential candidates, the united states secret service was always considered to be the elite law enforcement agency made up of men and women who were highly regarded, highly respected and highly trusted.
grace --ry has placed great faith and trust in the secret service. the agents of the uniform division are officers and the secret service agents have a monumental task. that of protecting the nation's presidents past present and future. they do so honorably and not without personal sacrifice. they ensure the safety of the first and second family, yes, and the safety of foreign dignitaries throughout washington and at times, throughout the world. ensure the safety of every men and women who emptied the white house and the company holdings. but a history of misbehavior, security failures has clearly blemished that record. gonzalezber 19, omar jumped the north fence, a ran across the white house lawn, up
whiteeps and into the house. he was armed with a three inch serrated knife. he entered through an unlocked door, past the staircase to the residence and into the east room of the white house. gentlemen, that was the part of my opening statement that was changed last night when the early also reports that in fact he had been apprehended just inside the front door was just inside by revelations that he had been -- penetrated much further into the white house. secret service officers only subdued him after he was clearly well inside the white house. an intruder walked in the front door of the white house, and that is unacceptable. there weree tells us a series of security failures.
not an instance of praiseworthy restraint. he reached at least five rings of security on september 19. the white house is supposed to one of america's most secure facilities, and in fact, one of the world's most secure facilities, so how on earth did it happen? has failure was once again tested the trust of the american people in the secret service, a trust he clearly depend on to protect the president. allowing the paparazzi crazed reality tv star to crash engaging dinner, after prostitutes, after excessive drinking and an agent falling asleep outside his room in the netherlands, and yes, and the
event,ling of the 11-11 a gunman who sprayed bullets has caused over $100,000 in damage. not properly reported in real-time or understood, it is understandable the morale but he it appears to decline in news report. in light of the recent break in him a we have to ask whether the culture at the secret service and possible declining morale have an impact in operation, and those are some of the questions today. the appointment of director pearson wrought nouveau the agency would reclaim the noble but to recent events have so troubled us that in fact we have called the director here to face tough questions. how could mr. gonzales faced the
fence -- scaled the fence? the fence to scale often. but how is it that was as ordinarily happen, agents did not immediately apprehend him? how was he able to sprint 70 yards, almost the entire length of the football field without being intercepted by guards at the fence? guardsn't security stopped him at the fence? what about sniper rifles? why were there no guard stations at the front door of the white house? and yes, how much would it cost to law the front door of the white house? the secret service must show how there is a clear path back to public trust. to today's hearings is to gain answers to the many questions plaguing the secret service. today we will hear from experts on both the agency protocol,
foreign and domestic, but most importantly, we will hear from the secret service your herself on her plans to improve the agency's performance. real danger as we serve abroad, especially those serviced at -- stationed at our embassies. it is a time of great peril. we are engaged in the battle against isis as we speak i'm above that is not limited to foreign soil. americans know the next attempt to take white house may not be wieldinged solo knife veteran with ptsd. it could be a planned attack from terrorist organization. is the system broke down on september 19. as it did when they crashed the state dinner in 2009.
ortega oaksen hernandez successfully shot the white house on november 11, 2011. as it did in cartagena when agents paid for prostitutes and compromise security, as it did in the netherlands in 2014. we cannot further allow this. , the secretntly service relies on two important .cales or fax the skill, the capability to protect the president must be at the highest level because they because 1%eed 99% failure is not an option come up but they also rely on the good faith belief i most people they should not even try, but this is the hardest target