Homeland Security Watch

News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security

January 29, 2014

Senate Intelligence Hearing: Current and Projected National Security Threats Against the United States

This morning the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a hearing “Current and Projected National Security Threats Against the United States.” Testifying were the Directors of National Intelligence, CIA, DIA, and FBI.

I’ve yet to watch the hearing or read the transcript, but thought they’d be worth sharing.


The transcript can be found here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/transcript-senate-intelligence-hearing-on-national-security-threats/2014/01/29/b5913184-8912-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print
  • LinkedIn


Comment by William R. Cumming

January 30, 2014 @ 2:05 am

Thanks Arnold and will watch in full later today!

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 30, 2014 @ 3:10 am

I watched the first 35 minutes of the hearing. Make no mistake! WE ARE THE WORLD’S POLICEMAN! A formulation I long disliked and disagreed with but since 9/11 has increased resiliency. The cover story of course is anti-terrorism and counter-terrorism.

Whether a PAX Americana is even possible remains a complete unknown. What is known is that conventional warfare has largely failed and very expensive in defending this PAX. And of course thousands of non-state actors resist this PAX and about 30 nation-states.

And of course the Hearing so far largely a cheering squad for the IC.

All in all it raises the question for me as to whether the PAX needs defending everywhere by the USA, largely alone, and does this defense have the consent of the governed and who, what, where, when, and how is this effort conducted and with what results?

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 30, 2014 @ 11:14 am

Well the tenor of the Hearing changed after the 30 minute mark and with 40 minutes to go we learned that anything to do with Eric Snowden and the damages he accomplished is classified and not to be discussed in public. Also cyber security a puzzle to all and complicated by Snowden releases. Not much on national security threats except that the world is complex and unorganized individuals the greatest threat to the USA so need to be under surveillance.

My guess is FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY soon to be narrowed to physical assembly of citizens and bloggers and social media groups will be labeled a clear and present danger at some future point in time.

Comment by Christopher Tingus

January 30, 2014 @ 10:58 pm

When asked about threat level, same as back in 9/11 – AQ more widespread and this administration telling the nation that AQ waning in influence when none of this is true….we are in much peril – wake up America!

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 31, 2014 @ 12:26 am

Chris’ comment again pinpoints the discussion that although “core” AQ has shrunk its ideological leadership has grown and spread. What none want to discuss is how the USA has made this possible.

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 31, 2014 @ 12:30 am

Perhaps puncuated by the nomination of Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize this hearing labels him the greatest threat to US national security ever. I wonder given Snowden’s access how many others out there?

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 31, 2014 @ 12:35 am

So the rest of the hearing confirmed the witness panel backing up Clapper’s ranking of threats:

[1] Cyber terrorism;

[2} Other terrorism;

[3] WMD detection and proliferation;

[4] Reduction of funding and authority of the IC.

Time will tell whether this analytic framework is correct!

Comment by Arnold Bogis

January 31, 2014 @ 12:55 am

I didn’t have the chance to watch the hearing today, but what I’d like to ask both of you is to describe, if possible, how if anyone differentiated the risk pre-9/11 and today.

It’s one thing to say that the risk of an attack on the homeland is as great as it was then. But what type of attack? Did any of the witnesses say a 9/11-level attack was possible? Worse? Or just an attack on the homeland?

Not to diminish the impact of any strike, but if we continue to face shoe and printer cartridge bombs instead of planes flying into buildings, landmarks toppled, and warships almost sunk, that’s not entirely a bad state of affairs.

Zero attacks would require a police state no one wants. Zero strategic attacks is attainable. But who will be the bravest Congress person to first admit the truth?

Comment by William R. Cumming

January 31, 2014 @ 1:23 pm

Arnold! The answer to your question was not provided but only suggested or inferred. Clearly another 9/11 is possible but hopefully probability has declined.

I do believe however that many that oppose PAX AMERICANA understand that UBL succeeded far beyond his wildest dreams and calculations.

If I am correct this Century will create its own form of chaos just as the last.


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>