the panel is just beginning its efforts, so i expect this to be laying out a roadmap. we look forward to hearing your plans. recognizeuld like to his comments. >> i want to thank the chairman for holding this hearing, because i think it is appropriate to take a minute and to hear from you about where we are in this process. often we're just focused on the , but i think the commission did such an extraordinary public service that the least we can do is to follow up and make sure the recommendations are appropriately being acted on. >> you may proceed as you see a proof.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. first we have a joint statement which has been provided to the committee. briefly, we each have a summary of that statement, which the committee will give and then questions.your we appreciate the opportunity to appear with my fellow you ofioners to inform our progress and plans to carry out the commission's work and to specifically the response to the 9/11 commission, what they have done, and other things that related to that. i think we have a very high regard for the fbi. i have worked, with them over 50 years. like any law enforcement or intelligence agency, while the

fbi works to mitigate a complicated array of threats, this is a dangerous world. at the same time as the director mentioned this morning, it's a work in progress. that is one of the principal areas in which we will also be our work. the subcommittee was instrumental in establishing this commission in relation to counterterrorism with four specific missions as stated. the objectives are first and assessment of the progress made and the challenges mentioned in implementing recommendations of the 9/11 commission related to the f the art. analysis on the trends of domestic terror since 2001.

and finally an assessment relating to any factors that andributed in any manner finally, any additional recommendations with counterterrorism policies that may come to light during the course of our investigations. congressional guidance constitutes a broad mandate to provide a balanced assessment of itsfbi's progress in transformation in implementing 9/11 recommendations, but unlike the 9/11 mandate, which was much broader, ours is not a charge to investigate catastrophic attacks or failures. our work will involve an examination of the structure,

organization, and policies terrorism and cyber security since 9/11. we will render findings and commit what is working and point out where improvement is indicated. we will make every effort to recommend practical steps to improve performance. we are in the process of thating a competent staff will be particularly rich with experience,rism including people who have worked with the 9/11 commission. we are developing a baseline of findings and recommendations with the number of studies and reports on the fbi's progress. some of them have been referred to earlier this morning like the webster commission. we don't want to reinvent the wheel. we want the bill that was already done. the performance of new programs since 9/11,

including those related to terrorism,iolent online radicalization, and the need to counter violent extremism. also be going to fbi training facilities to visit selective joint terrorism task ofces across the country various sizes because there is considerable difference in terms of the programs and availability of resources at the large, middle, and counterterrorism locations. we will be working through a study of several counterterrorism cases, several of which we referred to earlier today, as giving us an opportunity to look at what happened in those cases, what was successful and what was not successful and where improvement was needed. we will take a look at how closely the fbi is collaborating with other intelligence agencies

and with strategic partners at the state and local levels and are brought. we will study procedures in place to facilitate information sharing it in the united states and with international resources, and we feel this topic of information sharing will be a consistent theme as we ascessed these case studies i mentioned. that's my summary. i will turn to my colleagues. >> thank you, chairman wolf, ranking member. the opportunity to appear before you this morning with my fellow commissioners. it's a pleasure to serve and an honor to work with the fbi on important tasks the subcommittee has laid out for our commission.

i have dedicated my academic career, which spans 40 years, to the study of terrorism and to the dynamics of radicalization that can lead to violent extremism. this is a high priority national security issue that i know is of importance to you as it is to the fbi. the fbi is working hard on programs relating to homegrown violent extremism, online radicalization, and capturing violent extremists. share my observations. the variety of terrorists over the year evidence there is no one path to radicalization. the reason someone picks up a gun or blows himself up our personal, born of religious piety or the desire for economic change or commitment to

revolution, yet while there is no universal terrorist personality, nor is a single profile ever being produced, there are things we do now. terrorists are generally put invaded by a sense of albion misguided altruism. devout,are religiously and abiding commitment to their faith and the conviction their violence is not only the logically justified but demanded. theological arguments in this context are evoked by the organizations responsible for the attack and by the communities from which these terrorist come. , thee case of muslims affliction of violence, pronouncements have made -- have been made by radical clerics, confirming the legitimacy of violence with people and to

resist the invasion of muslim lands. radical islamic terrorist movements created a recruitment mechanism of incentives that sustain the violence campaigns despite america's withdrawal from iraq and pending departure from afghanistan. individuals will always be attracted to violence in different ways. look at those who have gravitated towards terrorism in recent years. we have seen east africa as well as those hailing from the middle east to the caribbean. we have seen lifelong devout muslims including one philadelphia suburban housewife blonde hair and was so atypical so as to defy profiling. radicalized over the internet, she sought to

these radicalized persons come from every walk of life. from people in menial jobs to people with criminal records. the persons in the middle and upper middle class backgrounds -- with university and graduate degrees. sports,sions for cars, rock music, and other material interests. relationships formed at work, school, teams -- as well as over the internet, can prey upon the susceptible. some of the first generation sons and daughters of immigrants embrace interpretations of their religion and heritage that is more political and extreme and more austere. it demands more personal sacrifice in the practice by their parents. the common elements in the process reflects these individuals and commitments to their faith, often newly

rediscovered, their admiration of terrorist movements or figures that they see as having struck a blow for their enemies, wherever they are and whoever they might be. hatred of their adopted homes -- and a profoundly shared sense of alienation. at the start of the war on terrorism, the enemy was clear and plainly in sight. it was a large terrorist organization situated in a geographic location and led by an identifiable leader. the borders between domestic and international terrorism are blurred. an asthmatices are individuals, a complete rethinking of our terrorism policies. we build an effective defense against everything. our challenge is to develop new defense against this new abuse

and individualized threat, while continuing to it --destroy al qaeda and its affiliates and the ideologies basis sport -- they support. i am happy to take any questions or comments you may have on radicalization or terrorism. >> thank you. i would like to salute and thank my colleagues here. it is an honor to work with them and i think we have great chemistry. hopefully, to the course of this commission, we will produce a product we are proud of. i am delighted to be back up in congress. i am seeing these ranking members, all friends of mine.

it is great to see you doing oversight work appear. hopefully we will have friendly questions today. we look forward to issuing a report when we are finished with this. byould want to start following mr. schiff in saluting you. you have made a decision to retire from politics, something i did a few years ago. you have made a significant difference not just in fairfax county and the united states, but around the globe. you have carved out hard work and effective efforts on trafficking issues and religious freedom. your constituents and the country are proud of that effort. we thank you for that heard work. i would ask mr. chairman that my formal statement be entered into the record. i will make some informal statements and comments.

my comments -- then a comment about the very good presentation. then i will talk about what makes commissions successful. as you have seen from the front page of the new york times this morning, our intelligence community is talking about their concern about the extremist carving out new territory in syria and learning skills and tradecraft there and coming back to the united states. this is oxygen for al qaeda. safe havens and possession of and access to territory and safe havens make them more effective and dangerous and deadly in the future. as you have said, this is an area where this commission can work with him as the new director of the f ei. we can look at what this threat might be for the world and the

united states. and make recommendations accordingly. and our testimony, mr. chairman, as you read through carefully, we have talked about three revolutions that have taken place over the series of the last few decades. one is a technological revolution. upl phones are opening liberty, freedom, and opportunities and elevating people out of poverty. doingo see what they are to potentially radicalizing the internet and chat rooms and magazines. what they can do to shorten the fuse for would-be terrorists. that is a challenge for the fbi. peopley hiring the right , are they fast and innovative enough to keep pace and counter this threat around the world? are they going to compete with

this dynamic and decentralized network? that is something that our commission will be looking at and making recommendations on. chairman, you have probably created many commissions. i have served on for commissions. i highly recommend them. leave congress, i served on the 9/11 commission and the commission on radicalization. i served on the commission of natural -- national parks. these commissions are created for many reasons. know, they are created for civil rights, education, assassinations, tragedies like the 9/11 attacks -- some created by the executive branch and some for congress. some are more effective than others in terms of their outcome and getting the recommendations through congress. probably madehat

the 9/11 commission, particularly effective, was the unity of purpose and unity of effort being worked on together. beings killedman in a matter of hours. that motivation, that attack by al qaeda, that devastation and death, really motivated us every day to work toward bipartisan solutions. the american people were intimately involved in public tasking us and encouraging us to get to the bottom of things to try to find out factually what went wrong and not to point fingers. to try to come up with sophisticated recommendations to reorganize the government so that we would not make the same mistakes again. so that we could share intelligence across agencies. we would fund technology efforts.

enough -- cannot get give enough credit to the families who participated in the 9/11 commission and how it got through congress. it was a bill that we worked on in the senate and the house. it never would've gotten through congress if it had not been for the tenacity and the loyalty and the hard work and the love of those 9/11 families. they worked tirelessly to try to make sure that something was done constructively about their losses. theher reason that commission and other commissions succeed is the clarity of the mission. the statutory mandate, so to speak. this committee, the staff has given us a very clear mandate. it is broad and aggressive. i think it is clear to us what we need to do in the next several months. hopefully with your help, we will be able to get to the bottom of the facts and give you

a good report. another important issue is leadership. leadership of the commission. from tom kane,ip a republican, and lee hamilton, a democrat. they would do a press conference apart from one another. there was no democrat or republican pride in authorship. they appeared together every time they did any kind of press, so they would be on message together. that was a message to the five democrats and five republicans that politics should be put aside and facts and recommendations should be the ultimate mission. of huge cooperation forgetting to the end mission is the cooperation of the agencies involved.

the 9/11 commission ultimately had big cooperation across the agencies for access to documents and to get support for briefings and follow-ups. that helped us with the lines to succeed. finally, we had a talented staff and experts in different areas that helped us on the commission. john gannon, we hired him as the executive director. he has 30 years of experience. we are in the process of trying to hire more staff. that will be a key issue in terms of our long-term success. chairman, ir. remember the lesson of my fifth grade catholic schoolteacher. she taught us that we have two ears and one mouth. we should use the two ears more than we use the one mouth. numerically, there's more for us to learn than to speak. as bruce and i came up your, we wanted to get your collective

your concernshat are about the fbi and where you would like us to go within the mandate. we are honored and privileged to work with you in this effort to make america safer. with that, a yield back the balance of my time. i look forward to your questions. i appreciate the testimony and i supported the 9/11 commission. there were a number of people for my district who died in the attack on the pentagon. i think the fact that the three of you -- bipartisan, is very important. one, the committee will do what ever you ask us to. i was appreciative of the yesterday in a conversation i had with him, and today, on the record. he was open daisy asked about doing this. that is very important.

i don't have a lot of questions because i know that you are in the early stages. staff, or how far along are you? part, most important initially, was getting john gannon to be our director. that was a major step. he is working very hard with the fbi. there are a number of your bureaucratic and procedural steps in hiring federal employees. inhibition inme getting the staff members rapidly on board. that is one thing we are working on quickly. -- we trust that that is being remedied. innovation wely

have had so far. other than that, we have had some excellent briefings already from fbi staff. we talk to people on the outside. i think that we are moving along and providing cash provided we can get through that hurdle. >> if i could support my colleague in his answer, i think that anytime you work with the government organizations, that cooperation is a work in progress. we hope to accelerate in and be more flexible in terms of our hiring procedures. we hope that government across the board can be more flexible in the future. especially in the intel community. when you are fighting a foe like al qaeda, it will be flat and dynamic risk we need to be quick in terms of how we are proactive. we are hopeful. >> the 9/11 commission distinguished recommendations between those that could we implemented and those requiring

statutory steps. we're looking at both sets of efforts. >> we will. expertor hoffman is an and already is studying this as part of his work at georgetown. so, we have a good fix on what has happened already. we will be looking at both the administrative and the things that might require legislation. >> do have an idea of how many recommendations were made? how many were made by 9/11 in a percentage basis that were implemented and how many were made that were never implemented? >> the ambassador is probably the best source. pride in working with congress and the white house on the answer to your question. 41 recommendations were made by the 9/11 commission.

about 39 of those were enacted into law. it is notams says, just acting on legislation. it is executing in an cementing them once they are passed. there are varying degrees of success on implementation. both by congress and the agencies. course, mr. chairman, i would be remiss if i did not bring up that my old body of congress, one of the remaining recommendations has to do with congress -- that was to re-organization of the jurisdiction for homeland security. it was buried and spread out to 100 different committees and subcommittees. we recommend that be narrowed. that still has not been acted on and we hope that some point it can be. >> i want to add from your standpoint -- appropriatedn was

by salaries and expenses. 13 and 14 to cover the cost. provide this committee with an estimate of your various costs. that includes travel and facility costs. we want to know if there is additional things -- now that you are on it, are there things we should be doing? if there is more, tell us in the next couple of weeks so we can make sure we address it. thank you, mr. chairman. let me welcome you again. the thing that interests me is the big decisions. the big decision after 9/11 was -- there was this tension about about whatthink

we're doing at nasa. we have commercialization. people want to defend the old nasa and others believe in commercial competition with different companies involved in space exploration. the decision about whether or -- we will have the old fbi chasing bank robbers. or whether the fbi would have to be transformed to be the premier agency focused on preventing attacks -- it was not about catching bad guys, really about printer -- but really about preventing these attacks on americans. that would change the entire mindset of how the fbi had been constructed as an institution. director,r from the

we still have some of this tension. between important issues like human trafficking -- white-collar crimes. the leaderboard for the agency in terms of what it is supposed to be doing is terrorism. so, you have this decision. it is still in my mind hanging out there. can serve not you many masters or have many bodies and be effective. sayhe airplane side, we create a whole new agency. the only job is to make sure that people do not get on the plane and have an ability to take them over. contributorst the -- inconvenience, they take their shoes and belt off, what ever the process, that is that.

in this bigger space, the question of whether or not the first decision about whether the agency itself needed to be full -- orle with one priority whether this multi-focus by terrorism at the front will work for the country. that is something i would love to peer you comment on. >> i think maybe each of us might give our own views. this is what i would call summary fashion. we are starting up -- bruce, why don't you start. >> the most important criteria is has the fbi kept us safe. i would say that it certainly has. the proof is in the pudding. i do not think in the dark days following the september 11

attack that they imagined we would go this far without a major terrorist attack. >> prior to 9/11, they had done the same. for many of my, colleagues, the forefoot incident- fort hood -- the question is whether or itself, whether multiple priorities span a range just this principal issue. whether that first decision was something you should look at again. >> i understand. you raise good points. that ionse is to say think that the f eia has changed in nor mislead. it has adopted a more intelligence driven approach. the problem is that the threats

that we face are constantly changing and evolving. the fbi is good at defending big terrorist attacks. we can see how the threat has evolved. individuals or boston marathon bombings with two teenagers. they were on the radar. the brother was on the radar. i think that is one of the things we want to look at. and learnsuccesses from the successes, but studied the works in progress. identify those and remedy them. i was involved in this debate as well. whether --ago, rightk we win in the direction by preserving the fbi

structure and by taking it at its word. i think director mueller did a lot to transform the agency. it has to be a complete transformation. the threat is constantly changing. that the fbi sure is well-positioned to respond to the trends and take advantage of new technologies. think, one of the strengths has always been the investigative powers. now, with the intelligence capabilities being built up, hopefully that will be at the same level. this is the great big question that you ask. we had weeks and months of debate on this on the 9/11 commission. we have three choices. do you recommend that the fbi can fiddle around the edges and fix itself from the errors or mistakes and challenges pre-9/11? that was one choice.

secondly, would we go outside the box and recommend the creation of an mri i've come a that would remove the capacity directly from the fbi. thirdly, would we make a recommendation in the middle and recommend to the fbi that they create a national security past four analysts and intel driven expectations? we decided to go with the third option. question, itgood is a work in progress. barriers has cultural and bureaucratic barriers. sometimes, that makes this a difficult transition. all of us havee, to get to the second part of your question. as they are making this transformation to an intel ,riven security agency

protecting the united states and its people, they have to be a will to do other things. they must be able to prove that they would go after the counterintelligence cyber threats. they must be able to go after people who violate civil rights and civil liberties. that history for the united states of america is very important. that mission is key. white-collar crime. they have to protect our cities. so, some of this is mutually beneficial. ad some of it is going to be big challenge for the fbi to get to. >> i think i agree. excellent question. this is one that we are considering as a commission. quite frankly, i agree with it. how that is implemented will be one of our major concerns and major areas of inquiry.

recognize that the fbi has the resources and the operation structure. they have the long history of excellent investigation and resources that you need for something like this. they also have an ongoing relationship with state and local law enforcement that is a valuable asset for them to -- that no other agency could approach. this is already a joint terrorist attacks -- task force which has shown that this is the best way to bring together the information that is so valuable from a lot of sources within the united date. they also have connections overseas. otherre better than any agency working with police forces in various states. there is another thing about the

fbi. they have long existed and carried on activities, particularly in the last couple of decades, with an appreciation and allegiance to the constitutional rights of people. this also, as you pursue these investigations, is an important aspect. it is basically their ability to transform the organization into an intelligence investigative agency. we will be looking at that very closely. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> a lot of credit to rector mueller. >> he was terrific. i want to thank each one of you for serving in this commission. thank you for putting us in the bill. we are privileged to have you -- you and your time is have seen the fbi evolve.

i want to ask you to take a minute and talk about that. critical change in the fundamental culture of the fbi. to be sure to protect the constitutional rights of people. this intelligence aspects, the changing culture that you mentioned, i want to explore them more. , from what yout have seen so far, and your initial inquiries -- the fbi has been able to adapt and integrate that intelligence gathering capability, with their traditional mission of sticks place -- strictly a law enforcement entity. >> they are different missions. how do you see them overlapping? usi think that each of

represents our own view. in my own case, i think they have done a good start. they have transformed a different culture from evidence in court to having investigations and an investigative sense of going beyond what the evidence in court is and what the significance is of what they're learning. as to have the imagination and the broader picture that is necessary for intelligence work. i think we have made a start at this. some evidence of that is the fact that they have already started. they are raising the importance of analysts who are not fbi agents. there is still a long way to go. agents did the hard work to

support people in a lesser magnitude of work. we realize that intelligence analysts are as important as agents in getting the big picture of intelligence. the fact is that, structurally, they are changing the rules. they are certainly changing the numbers. it is a much higher percentage than ever before. i think that that is something where the director is very interested in following. the way in which he is interacting with the structural ,hanges organization in the fbi creation of the national security bureau at the highest directory of intelligence -- these are all signs that there is a commitment at the level of director. any change in culture will

always take time. >> bruce? >> we are still in the early days. to say, personally, i am impressed by the intelligence analysts who participated in the briefings and were outstanding individuals. some of the best in the community. whether there are issues about cultural is nation and integration that went on -- i cannot say. of the people are extraordinarily impressive. the question about the fbi as an intelligence source of -- one of the problems in the united kingdom was that not all of the surveillance they do is in court. it is different for the fbi. they lead to prosecution. >> that is what i was driving at. 50, whereas also

there are more jurisdictions here. many of them have special branches, or intelligence divisions. that is one of the challenges in the united states. discussion, we have intelligence units in los not every police department has an intelligence unit. that is who we work closely with. the transition has gone surely to an intelligence agency and probably would not have suited the united date, even if it was desirable. looking very hard is the integration of intelligence analysts and people who are special agents. the director has made a firm commitment to ensuring that role. i would say, to your point, a

few laws -- now that the fbi has been asked to create this bureau, we have already been briefed. we probably had a half dozen or a dozen briefings by very talented people. are they the exception to the rule? is this national security bureau being pushed down from mr. mueller and mr. komi? there are successful career paths on the analytical side. that will be something that we will look at carefully. secondly, what are the metrics that will be analyzed? we often hear from the fbi special agent that they will look at clues and cases as try to determine if there is a prosecution. can we put somebody in jail? the analysts are asking a

different question. they should be asking questions, is this to the chairman's point? are they radicalizing others? are they trying to radicalize through the internet? how do we follow them? what intelligence to we gather for broader strategy to understand what is going on? so, i think that will be very important. thirdly, you mentioned a couple of cases this morning. bruce and i will look at these cases. case in new york and the subway bombing -- how did the jt ts, that generally work well together, did they work well together and all of these cases? we see that they may have worked well together, but not work as

closely or shared information in fort hood. why is that? how do we ensure more consistent efforts between the jtts? these are some things we will look at. we will look at these on a base by -- case-by-case basis. >> i will follow-up with you finish with the general. i want to talk about the privacy rights of individual americans. after he finished, thank you. >> you are going to meet with director mueller and director joyce? that is a good idea. one of the key elements to look at domestic radicalization, according to research, there have been 74 threats since 9/11. 53 in the last five years alone.

including fort hood, times square, and boston marathon. how will the commission study this threat? do you have any initial comments? the second.come to any thoughts? well, this goes back to my point about the threat evolving and changing. common sense dictates that that may be the tip of the iceberg . in syria, is going on focusing attention on americans going to serious, this is an enormous issue. it is a bigger rally cry then afghanistan was. it is much easier to get to syria. it is a nato ally.

it is in the heart of the middle east, the arab world. it is used by al qaeda and other terrorist groups. what is so consequential is that we are saying this transition from top-down propaganda, websites and magazines, now matched by social media. twitter accounts, facebook, something i have never heard of -- this is being used to radicalize. there is an enormously worrisome potential. he was sove -- effective because he could communicate in his own vernacular. he came back to the united states and went to university, could communicate in english. that is what we are seeing from british jihadists. i follow them on twitter. they follow me as well.

you see people with thousands of followers. there is one who has 24,000 followers. --to haveficult with 1000 and 4000 followers. they post eating together and praying together. they direct messages to others in the west and say come on, it is easy. this is what you can find. here's what our lives are like. we're making the sacrifice. on an individual level, we will phoenix loge and -- see an explosion in recruitment. that is what we're looking at. we have had briefings on internet radicalization. what about the next thing? social media is gearing up. >> this is an excellent question.

bruce, covered in his testimony, how interesting all -- people like this are. they are somehow meeting with errorists back on 9/11. we're not sure if they were co-conspirators are just meeting on the margins. he then ends up getting involved in jihad he practices and teaching that in the united kingdom. he comes back and goes back to yemen and starts radicalizing people on the internet and in chat rooms. four of the five successful post-9/11 attacks were taken on by lone wolf. they are inspired by him. he dies by a drone attack and nspires attacks from

the grave. it is interesting how he is able to radicalize people. what is the fbi doing to understand that threat? who are they hiring? are they getting access to the best and the brightest? are they bringing in people who can anticipate where al qaeda and terrorist groups go with these technologies? as mr. komi set a couple of hours ago, are they able to have the resources from congress to train people and educate people to this threat? are they bringing in people from mit? and gettingbout mit the best minds together in the united states to understand where these people are coming from. i remember the 9/11 commission -- tom clancy had written a novel before 9/11 about an airplane that was going to crash into the

united states capital. we need to make sure that our folks at the cia and the fbi are red teaming and thinking ahead of the terrorists. we need to hire the people who help us think ahead of them and have organizations that are not hierarchical. my colleagues have said very well, i would not think that -- the fact that we have had 53 threats in the last five years indicates that the threat of terrorism continues. there was a feeling, particularly when bin laden was somehow terrorism was no longer as great a threat. it does continue to be a very serious threat to us. of homegrown radicalization has continued to grow.

i think that the main lesson that we have to learn as a nation is we cannot allow our guard to be let down. you have to be very cognizant of what a threat this is. one of the things that has fact thatis the al qaeda, which was centralized at one time -- if you have a centralized enemy, it is easier to fight in a decentralized enemy. we have a decentralized enemy internationally. and a centralized terrorism threat within our own country. workything, the type of the fbi is doing is more important today or is as important as it was before 9/11. >> i'm going to go to mr. culbertson. i have a whole series of questions. i was going to ask you about the internet and radicalization.

i am really glad that you're looking at this. all the buregered autels. there was another american killed in some ollanta. -- somalia. they were all somalinasans. when i talk to people who have gone to syria, almost none of them are syrians. they're almost all from other places. the fbi is so busy doing things. they have to be reflected on these. any marked up soon, pick up the phone and say that we think preliminarily -- let us know. same with the director. if there is something that we

can shift around or do because a guy at omb is looking at it and thinking we could take something from here and put it there -- if you have any ideas between now and next month, call us and tell us. i am very grateful that you are willing to do this. frankly, i don't think you could have three better people to look at this from an experience point of view. interested. the media did not even pick you up for the longest time. --sh eyes on the target always come and take with fresh eyes. if anyone is here from the fbi. i do appreciate that the director has been very open. they say that we want this done. i want to thank the director for having this open attitude and

thank you to the three of you for your service. >> if i could, thank you. want to personally thank you all for extraordinary service that you have rendered to the country. permission, we have just a little bit of time. hope that you will keep in the forefront of your mind as you go forward -- i hope this is agreeable with you. youmber, ben franklin, don't want to -- you will end up with neither if you trade freedom for safety. it is important to all of us as americans that we identify who our enemy is. withve to be very careful protecting the privacy of individual americans. that has never been surrendered, from the beginning of the nation.

general, when you said we are facing a decentralized enemy in an era where the internet -- you cannot take the battery out of this thing and turn it off. it is ubiquitous. i am delighted to hear that the fbi director does not use one. it gives you an idea how dangerous these are. i hope that you will keep that at the forefront of your mind. efforts of the fbi to gather it intelligence -- talk to us if you could during this time, help to guide us as policymakers. keep it in your mind -- how do we, in this whole new era of incredible access to information, we know -- fbi has told us that the chinese can turn on cameras remotely and watch and hear everything you're doing. how do we protect individual privacy rights of americans?

americans.w-abiding dr. hoffman, you say you follow this guy on twitter to see what he's up to. does the fbi have the right to come in and invade your privacy? does any government have the right ? they broke into your community --computer, the chinese government broke into his personal computer. you are helping chinese dissidents. they stripped it and put a virus on there. does the government have that right? you have a professional interest. i'm not worried about you. you?does that do to well, as long as no laws are

being broken -- >> you knocked on the guys door, basically. you access him. >> i am listed as a follower. there is no secret. >> does the fbi have the right to search computers? >> i certainly hope they are monitoring the fact that i am monitoring them and trying to figure out if i am someone. i think that we count on 00 -- this is why having an agency that is not strictly an intelligence agency, that is conscious of privacy rights and constitutional rights is important. >> it is not just that the agency is conscious. i hope that you'll also consider what we can do is policymakers to ensure that americans are keenly aware about what -- e-mail, imunicate via

think of consent. when you download a new program or access, you get that consent thing. i agree to the terms and conditions. one way might be to ensure that if you are communicating with, accessing one of these websites -- the fbi should in fact the guys computer and fry it up. at minimum, there should be some notice. i just wanted to know that you're axing this website and talking to somebody who is monitored by the federal government. is there a way? >> i think we are constantly giving the solution of threat. the u.s. government and agencies are constantly finding and striving to strike a balance between the two. the case we talked about early as the point. the fbi is reluctant because they thought that he was only

soliciting on theological arguments. >> it was also practice on the part of the army. >> my personal view is that we have to help those who protect and defend us and hope they are monitoring these things in making a determination. there is a general discussion. this is brand-new. this is something we have never seen before. in my mind, correct me if i'm wrong, aren't there certain individual liberties and rights never surrendered to government? i always think of patrick henry and the founders. is it accurate to say that -- from my reading of the constitution, the whole intent of the constitution to preserve our liberty and provide for the common defense -- fundamentally, the government was created to protect our liberty.

correct me if i am wrong, but in andeading, patrick henry the founders never surrendered the right to self-defense. that is accurate, since it? -- isn't it? >> that is true and it is reflected in our laws. the constitution itself was designed to be a protection against the invasion of liberties. that was one of the major concerns of the founders. --1787, they conceived the anti-federalists were concerned that this might eat up our liberties. that is why they were concerned about central government. >> they refused to sign the constitution, i believe. >> if you look at what the government is doing in terms of intrusion, it is not coming from law enforcement. >> yeah. as a part of your thought process, i hope that you will think about this and recommend

what we can do. make sure that we protect these liberties. >> i think that will be a concern that we have. youongressman, if i could, have been eloquent in your quotations. one of my favorite quotations is from abraham lincoln. paraphrasing him, he talked about -- we will never be destroyed from an enemy from the outside. the only way we will destroy america will be by removing freedoms and liberties from ourselves. we must protect those constitutional rights and freedoms. that is something that bruce and i will ask in our briefings. and we do ask -- how does the fbi continued to stay on the right side of the first amendment of the constitution? also, be aggressive in going after terrorists. we mentioned the other case to you.

there is an intelligence bureau negotiated,that has according to the book, and enemies within. there are rules forward they can be more aggressive in going after suspects and looking into cases. staybi shores us that they within the constitution and within the first amendment in nice investigation. we will keep asking those questions. i would say, though, congressman -- we talked about this on the 9/11 commission. congress has the opportunity in your oversight to look at the nsa issue. issues, data collection drone policies -- eavesdropping and other things. it is much better for congress to debate these issues with clarity and due diligence, hopefully in a bipartisan way, and get it right rather than waiting for the next attack.

we are stampeding toward ill that mayhrough laws not balance the constitution. >> that's why am asking these broad questions. you are perfectly positioned to guide us in that effort. it is so vital. also, to remember what you say about facing a decentralized enemy. our strength as a nation is our individual right to privacy is decentralized and we trust the individual americans. they never gave up the right to self-defense and never surrendered the freedom of thought or religion. there are so many fundamental freedoms. my memory is that most of these attacks, like the one in kentucky, so many have been identified -- we have spotted people on the internet. it has been individual police officers and american to have stopped this. passengers on flight 93 showed courage.

if not for them, the capital would not be here. together,ort was put talk to us and guide us on what we can do as policymakers to make sure that we're doing all that we can to help the fbi do their job and also to protect and reinforce and reaffirm our faith in the individual good judgment of average americans to do the right thing for the right reasons. protecting themselves and their families and communities and states. that is our greatest strength. the enemy will never crack that. as long as we have faith in the individual americans to protect themselves and their freedoms, they will never conquer us. >> that will be an important consideration that we will give chore work. also, to the fact that most important is making sure that the public it's the truth about what is going on. the transparency and that sort of thing. i have been very much impressed

with director call me. -- k omi. we will be cognizant of that. >> thank you. likelyst is a lot more to attack texas. he will not last long. >> thank you for creating this commission. i have four children. one is 13, grace. she goes to school in your district. she was born right before 9/11. you all passionately talk about 9/11 you talk about it like it happened yesterday. we have a lot of constituents that do not remember it quite so well. someone said it is a lot like gettysburg. it happened a long time ago. some people are tragically forgetting about it. it is hard work to put this commission to work.

we are trying to make sure that the american people never forget died.the 2900 people who our agencies keep changing and keep performing and transforming. we are very grateful to you for putting us to work. we need your help in the months ahead. >> i would like to join in thanking the committee. and also thanking the chairman for his tremendous leadership in the congress. and the causes you have taken under your wayne. -- wing. you have brought to the attention of this body, and to congress, all you have done for human rights and so all right. and for the country as a whole. this is kind of a champion of the whole issue, taking a look at the fbi and making sure they are doing the best for the country. that is an example of your

interest and where you put your personal energies and your personal position on the line to make sure that things are done properly. i just want to join in thanking you for your service and i appreciate very much being one of your constituents. i am very grateful to you. >> thank you. let us know -- >> thank you. >> next come live, your calls and comments on "washington journal." then "newsmakers." courtthat, the supreme oral arguments on the contraceptive provision of the health care law. >> two weeks after the burglary, i received a large envelope.

it had a return address of liberty publications, pennsylvania. that did not mean anything to me, but it was intriguing. inside was a cover letter from the citizens commission to investigate the fbi. urlerys the name of the b --that the burglars gave each other. thatdescribed the fact they had burglarized and fbi office. they had become concerned that there were informers and antiwar and civil rights organizations. to confront this except by giving evidence of suppression taking place. enclosedhe files were and they hope that i would make public these files sent to 5

people. two members of congress -- and three journalists, not name d. so i started to read them. that paranoia document stood out. i was not sure that they were real. it might be a hoax. >> on march 8, 19 71, a group broke into an f ei office in pennsylvania and stole every document in the building. the story tonight at 8:00 on "q&a." >> this morning, the council president and ceo fred kempe reviews president obama's trip abroad. then tony clark discusses the health care act. talks about the current state of the tea party. and an examination of the u.s.

role and situation in ukraine. and we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪washington good morning. after a weeklong trip to europe and saudi arabia, the president is back at the white house this morning. while in president -- while in paris, secretary of state kerry eating with his counterpart. in washington this week, congress is back in session. the affordable care act will be front and center as another deadline is met tomorrow, but we're going to begin this morning with your assessment of the president's foreign policy. your calls and comments at (202) 585-3880, that is our line for democrats. (202) 585-3881 for