neil: your argument is that agencies should be talking to one another, that if we learn anything, pre9/11, they weren t doing enough off that. do you think in this kind of case when its comes to personal information, even a group s personal information, they can go too far? they ve and can that s why regulations and rules are in place but sometimes neil: what do you mean regulations? too many groups were targeted. we have seen no e-mails of anything other than available information being requested. neil: even arguing the target you fine that agent sore did. no. because conservative groups were targeted, liberal groups were targeted, occupy neil: we tried like the dickens to get any -than -liberal groups on. no one came forward and said we were targeted. i would believe it if they talk about it. i haven t.
i would say better late than never. but it does remind me of the critique of the clinton administration after the attack on the uss cole when we sent the fbi to investigate in yemen, there was resistance by the authorities. we were then pre9/11, looking at the law enforcement paradigm, treating it like a crime instead of like war. i m glad we have sealed indictments, but the question is if we have the intelligence, we have cia on the ground, we have our producer out there, why haven t we snatched them, interrogated them. the answer is that this administration from the beginning decided to do everything that the bush to undo everything the bush administration had done, so we ve had no interrogations, nowhere to put them, nowhere in guantanamo. all you can do is indictment, trial in new york, or nothing. just a few seconds ago, darrell issa released a statement on the latest
they are really narrowing down the scope of the closings to north africa and the middle east although they also say they don t know where these attacks are being are going to take place. i think that is the assessment of the intelligence community that those are the likeliest places. but it should be added that they don t know what the target is. they can t certainly say that it s against the u.s. diplomatic post. it could be other western interests. for that reason both france and the uk have decided to keep their embassy in yemen closed through thursday. they are still trying to find out more about this but, so far, any further information about this has been elusive. as we have been listening to experts on the intel and richard haass talking about the fact this is the new normal, many of the elect officials coming out talking about the chatter reminds them of pre9/11. thj the su norm isn t this a real impact now? the fear that can be the fear
chatter out there, chatter means conversation among terrorists about the planning that s going on, very reminiscent of what we saw pre9/11. fox report, so what is possible? what we re learning about the enemy s latest strategies to kill us. and our best options to keep americans safe. also a witness says the driver was looking for blood, summertime on the board walk for hundreds of people shattered by someone on a mission to mow down the crowd. he sped up and purposely, looks like purposely was swerving back and forth to run over as many people as he could. he was intentionally doing it, he wasn t honking his horn or anything, he was doing like 40 miles per hour and just hitting people. in minutes, how police say the suspect stalked his targets before the deadly crime. i am harris faulkner. we begin with new information on an al qaeda terror threat prompting washington to take record precautions around the globe. embassies, consulates remaining
america is at a cross roads. we must define the nature and scope of this struggle or else it will define us. chris: president obama laying out the beginning of an exit strategy from the global war on terror this country has been fighting since 9/11. and we are back now with the panel. well, the president said that the scale of the threat we face now is more like what we saw you before 9/11 than what we saw in the years immediately thereafter. brit, is that sensible thinking or dangerous? well, it is interesting. what he say about it is that i hope this does not return us to the mindset toward terrorism that existed pre9/11 which was that it was a law enforcement matter principally and we he should pursue it in that way and not the treat it as a worldwide blend of military intelligence and in some cases police work. what i would what i think we have to say about the war on terror are is that by and large