指数“></a> <br> <hr> <blockquote> <pre> <doc> S. HRG。BETWEEN国土安全部门和情报社会关系的107-562综述=======================================================================的政府事务委员会美国参议院一前听证会HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ JUNE 26 and 27, 2002 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 80-609 WASHINGTON : 2002 _____________________________________________________________________________ For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman CARL LEVIN, Michigan FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio MAX CLELAND, Georgia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri JIM BUNNING, Kentucky MARK DAYTON, Minnesota PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Staff Director and Counsel Susan E. Popper, Counsel Michael L. Alexander, Professional Staff Member Richard A. Hertling, Minority Staff Director William M. Outhier, Minority Chief Counsel Jayson P. Roehl, Minority Professional Staff Member Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk C O N T E N T S ------ Opening statement: Page Senator Lieberman............................................ 1, 61 Senator Thompson............................................. 3, 63 Senator Akaka................................................ 5, 65 Senator Collins.............................................. 6, 81 Senator Cleland.............................................. 7, 97 Senator Voinovich............................................ 7, 85 Senator Dayton...............................................38, 88 Senator Durbin............................................... 41 Senator Carper............................................... 46 Senator Carnahan............................................. 65 WITNESSES Wednesday, June 26, 2002 Hon. Ashton B. Carter, Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University and Assistant Secretary of Defense (1993-1996), International Security Policy................................................ 9 Lt. Gen. Patrick M. Hughes, U.S. Army (Ret.), former Director (1996-1999), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), U.S. Department of Defense..................................................... 13 Jeffrey H. Smith, former General Counsel (1995-1996), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)...................................... 16 Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, U.S. Army (Ret.), former Director (1985-1988), National Security Agency (NSA).................... 19 William B. Berger, Chief of Police, North Miami Beach, Florida and President, International Association of Chiefs of Police... 23 Thursday, June 27, 2002 Hon. George J. Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)...................................... 67 Hon. Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)............................................ 70 Hon. William H. Webster, former Director of Central Intelligence (1987-1991) and former Director (1978-1987), Federal Bureau of Investigation.................................................. 93 Hon. Bob Graham, a U.S. Senator from the State of Florida and Chairman, Select Committee on Intelligence, U.S. Senate........ 106 Hon. Richard C. Shelby, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama and Vice Chairman, Select Committee on Intelligence, U.S. Senate......................................................... 109 Alphabetical List of Witnesses Berger, Chief William B.: Testimony.................................................... 23 Prepared statement........................................... 166 Carter, Hon. Ashton B.: Testimony.................................................... 9 Prepared statement........................................... 125 Graham, Hon. Bob: Testimony.................................................... 106 Prepared statement with an attachment........................ 191 Hughes, Lt. Gen. Patrick M.: Testimony.................................................... 13 Prepared statement........................................... 135 Mueller, Hon. Robert S., III: Testimony.................................................... 70 Prepared statement........................................... 184 Odom, Lt. Gen. William E.: Testimony.................................................... 19 Prepared statement........................................... 156 Shelby, Hon. Richard C.: Testimony.................................................... 109 Prepared statement with an attachment........................ 209 Smith, Jeffrey H.: Testimony.................................................... 16 Prepared statement........................................... 140 Tenet, Hon. George J.: Testimony.................................................... 67 Prepared statement........................................... 175 Webster, Hon. William H.: Testimony.................................................... 93 Additional Material Submitted for the Record June 26, 2002 American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), prepared statement........ 221 Richard J. Davis, prepared statement............................. 232 Questions for the Record and responses from: Hon. Ashton B. Carter........................................ 241 Lt. Gen. Patrick M. Hughes with an attachment................ 242 Jeffrey H. Smith............................................. 256 Lt. Gen. William E. Odom..................................... 259 Chief William B. Berger...................................... 266 June 27, 2002 FBI letter regarding search capabilities of the FBI's Automated Case Support (ACS) System...................................... 267 Questions for the Record and responses from: Hon. William H. Webster...................................... 270 Hon. George J. Tenet......................................... 273 Hon. Richard C. Shelby....................................... 278 A REVIEW OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY ---------- WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 2002 U.S. Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:33 a.m., in room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Lieberman, Akaka, Cleland, Dayton, Durbin, Carper, Thompson, Stevens, Collins, and Voinovich. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN LIEBERMAN Chairman Lieberman. Good morning. The hearing will come to order. I want to welcome our witnesses. Today, we are going to hold the second of four hearings designed to take an intense look at the Homeland Security reorganization plan proposed by President Bush and how best to merge it with legislation reported out of this Committee a little over a month ago. As we create this new Department of Homeland Security, one of our priorities clearly has to be to address what was the single biggest security shortcoming of our government before September 11, and that was the way in which our government coordinated, or failed to coordinate, intelligence. Suffice it to say that a few infamous memos and warnings, now notorious, and the picture they may have painted if they had been understood in relationship to one another are now a perplexing part of American history. And so our challenge is to build a more focused, more effective, more coordinated intelligence system that synchronizes information from the field, analyzes it, converts it, and then turns it into action that can prevent future attacks against the American people here at home. Last week, the Committee was privileged to hear from Governor Ridge on how the administration's plan and proposal would coordinate intelligence gathering, analysis, and implementation. Today, we are going to hear from what might be called a distinguished alumni group from the Intelligence Community and the national security community to get the benefit of their experience and good counsel on the best solution that we can adopt as part of our new Department of Homeland Security or related to it. Tomorrow, we will hear from the Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, the Director of the CIA, George Tenet, and Judge William Webster, who was the former Director of both the CIA and the FBI, but not simultaneously. We will also hear from the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senators Graham and Shelby, because their expertise, including that gained from their current investigations, can certainly help us craft the most effective legislation. Our fourth hearing on Friday will explore the President's proposal to address the problem of weapons of mass destruction and the relevant science, technology, and public health issues associated with detecting, protecting against, and combating these weapons, and particularly the fourth directorate, if I can call it that, or division, that the President establishes in his proposal. With all that in mind, clearly, the part of this reorganization that has drawn most public attention and most attention and thoughtful concern, I am pleased to say, by Members of the Committee is the question of how to bring the intelligence establishment together with the law enforcement community to avoid the kind of information breakdown that appears to have occurred prior to September 11. The President's proposal to establish an intelligence analysis clearinghouse within the new Department is a step in the right direction, although I think we still want to understand better what is intended and to see if there is a way we can strengthen the proposal. Under the President's plan, as I understand it, the Department of Homeland Security would provide competing analysis, so to speak, but the FBI, CIA, and a handful of other intelligence agencies would still have primary responsibility to uncover and prevent specific threats or conspiracies against the American people. In other words, no one office would be designated to pull the threads together and the dimensions of that and how we can focus it most effectively is something I would be very eager to hear from our witnesses today. Our Committee bill proposed a different approach, which I do not argue on its face is adequate to the threat at this point, as we better understand it today, either. Primarily at Senator Graham's urging, we established an anti-terrorism coordinator in the White House with the statutory and budget authority to pull the various elements of the anti-terrorism effort together, and that would include not just the new Department of Homeland Security, but the Intelligence Community, law enforcement, and State and Defense Departments, as well. In short, the coordinator would be in a position to forge the kinds of relationships that would be necessary to get the information needed to connect the dots and have a chance of seeing a picture more clearly. Today, we welcome the witnesses that are before us to hear their response to these two ideas and hopefully separate ideas that they themselves have. Several people have suggested the creation of a domestic intelligence agency along the lines of Britain's MI5, which, as many of you know, works closely with both local police, Scotland Yard, etc., and the Foreign Intelligence Agency, MI6, and reports to the Home Secretary. The view of those who advocate this idea is that the FBI's law enforcement mission conflicts with the intelligence-related tasks we are going to increasingly give it, and that it is assuming now after September 11, and thus, the counter-terrorism functions of the FBI and CIA would be merged into this new Department. Others have been troubled by suggestions to break up the FBI, of course, but also troubled by the civil liberties implications that are associated with such an agency and we will want to hear from our witnesses about that. Our colleague from Pennsylvania, Senator Specter, has presented another proposal which, in some sense, builds on the President's proposal, that would create a National Terrorism Assessment Center within the new Department that would have authority to direct the CIA, FBI, and other intelligence agencies to provide it with all information relating to terrorist threats. That center would pull experienced intelligence analysts from across the Federal Government to analyze, coordinate, and disseminate information to law enforcement agencies and it has an interesting requirement in it somewhat like the Goldwater-Nichols proposal, that people in the different intelligence agencies of the government would have to serve a time in this National Terrorism Assessment Center as part of their promotional path up. We are going to hear other ideas today from a superb group of witnesses. What struck me last week at the first hearing we held with Governor Ridge and Senators Hart and Rudman is the really intense desire of Members of the Committee, certainly across party lines, to figure out the best way to get this job done, and this job meaning both the new Department of Homeland Security and particularly this question of coordinating intelligence and law enforcement. We feel that this is not only a moment of challenge, but a moment of opportunity, and I think most of us have not yet found a comfortable place to conclude our quest, particularly with regard to intelligence and law enforcement coordination. So I look forward to this hearing today with confidence that this distinguished panel of witnesses will help us in that effort and I thank them very much for being here. Senator Thompson. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR THOMPSON Senator Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask that my statement be made a part of the record. Chairman Lieberman. Without objection. Senator Thompson. I think that if we were too comfortable right now in our quest to reach these solutions, we would be premature. That is the very reason, of course, why we have these hearings, and I want to compliment you on this array of witnesses that we have today. I think they are exactly the kind of people we ought to be talking to as we work our way through this. We are dealing primarily today with the intelligence piece. My own view is that, without a doubt, we will conclude after our Intelligence Committee hearings, which I am a part of, that there are deficiencies and inadequacies. I think we have known that for a long time before September 11. We simply have not kept up to the new world that we are now living in since the end of the Cold War. In terms of human intelligence, in terms of ability to penetrate, we are going to have to do much better. We have seen major deficiencies in terms of collection, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence information. I think the question for us here is to what extent will this legislation fix that, and to what extent is it designed to? I tend to think, at this stage of the game,