Cartridge . He was involved in overseeing a number of these activities, yes, there was a relationship. Were they so concealed that the first attempt to find did not find them . Yes, the method used was one of the best we had ever encountered. So mr. Alawlaki is by not an american citizen by where anyone in america would be proud . He was part of al qaeda, and it was his determination to kill americans on behalf of al qaeda. Thank you. Is it true that in the last four years the fbi has arrested 100 people, either planning, conspiring, or trying to commit a terrorist attack on this nation . Yes, they have arrested a lot of people. That is because of good, sound intelligence. I think what people forget is that they will kill us if they can and it is extraordinarily difficult if you cannot get into where they were hiding. Would it have been possible to have arrested mr. Alawlaki where he was in the yemen . We work very closely with yemenis to see if we can arrest individuals. If we can, we want to do that because it is valuable for us. Any actions taken in concert with the Yemeni Government are done in terms of any types of strikes we might engage there with them, are done only because we do not have the ability to bring those individuals into custody. Thank you. My time is up. Senator chambliss . Thanks, madam chair. In 2002 what was your knowledge of interrogation videotapes about zebeda, and did you see any information about a review of them in 2002 . I do not have their recollection of that, senator. Of the tapes or that request . At the time in 2002, i did not know what my involvement or knowledge was at the time. I believe i was aware of the briefings being taped. It should be no surprise that many members have been dissatisfied with the administrations cooperation on the benghazi inquiries. Senator graham asked director clapper if he was aware of the attacks in the summer of 2012 and asked if he had informed the president about those attacks. Those seemed like reasonable questions, and dni said we would be given an answer. When we got an answer back from the dni, there was a notation next to this particular question that senator graham asked, and here is what it said per nss, no response required. Mr. Brennan, that is your shop. Do you have any knowledge about why senator grahams question was not to be answered . There is a longstanding tradition understanding of respecting the executive privilege that exists in the presidency in terms of what information is provided to the president or advice, counsel, to him. I would suspect that that question gets into this issue of the executive privilege which i think again has been a long standing tradition. Are you sure that is the answer or do you think . I do not understand, because that will not be a request coming to me. I understand, so my direction to you, at what i ask you, is that you review that. We will get you the and notation, if necessary. Secretary panetta told us it was detainee information that was key to them finding the courier and bin laden. Were you briefed by any of the analysts who tracked down bin laden . Before the operation . Yes. Yes, absolutely. Is that the information given to you, that it came from interrogation of detainees on whom eips had been used . I cannot recall. They talked about the chain of collection that took place related to the information coming from the detainees. Do you agree with secretary panettas comments . Senator, looking at this document from ssci, i do not know what the facts are. I really need to look at that carefully and see what cias response is. The report called into question whether any information was unique. Fair enough. The secretary comments are indirect you told me a couple days ago when we met that the study was not objective, and it was a prosecutors brief, written with an eye toward finding problems. You went on to say your withholding judgment until you read the response. My understanding is from what he said, that is what you are going to do. Suppose the cia takes a position and finds that the conclusions are wrong. I know john brennan well enough to note that you are quick to stand up and say what is on your mind and what ever you conclude. I am not want to ask you for response to that, but i know you will give us your thoughts and opinions about cias response to it and how we move forward with this. I will do that. Thank you very much. Senator wyden. I mean senator rockefeller. Thank you, madam chair. I just made a comment to the chair, mr. Brennan, that i have been through a whole lot of confirmation hearings in 28 years here, including quite a few cia directors. I quite honestly do not recall anybody who is more forthright, more direct, more accommodating without violating who you are, more open to the possibility of working with this committee in a way that will do two things one, that will give the folks at cia who probably constantly worry about what is the next awful thing that we are going to say about them, but that is not our intention because we are into the business of problem solving, and if we have a 26,000page document, it is not fun for us if we are trying to solve a problem. I have a feeling you understand that, you have a feeling that you feel the cia, if they felt they were working in with some contention with the Oversight Committee in the senate, but that the senate was involved, was informed, interested, that this would be something they would welcome. That there are a lot of people over at the cia who may be stuck in that midlife crisis, etc. , who are looking for an open, fresh, a strong leader. I happen to think you are that leader. I have felt that since our conversation. I felt that from before our conversation. And we have not had our secret meeting yet, so i am sure i am not going to change my mind. I think you have done an extraordinary job of patience, courtesy, and the only question you could not answer that i am aware of is who was it that took notes on the meeting that you had 20 years ago. But i find it in my heart to forgive you for that. To me, i think you are a terrific leader, and i will look forward to tuesday, i think you are the guy for the job and the only guy for the job. Thank you, senator, for your very kind words, and i have not lived up to them yet. It is a daunting task to go to cia. I want every member of this committee to be defender of the men and women of the cia, and i see it as my obligation to represent them to you on their behalf, so when times get tough and when people are going to be criticizing the cia, i have all of you to say you knew about what the cia were doing, and you will defend them. Thank you. Senator burr . I will be brief because i notice you are on your fourth glass of water and i do not want to be accused of waterboarding you. With the exception of our request for the president ial daily briefs around the time of benghazi, which there was executive privilege claim, do you know of any other claim of the state of privilege on the documents that this committee is waiting on now . I know there are requests for emails that might have taken place between the Intelligence Community and the white house, and so there are a number of elements that i think people are looking at. But none that executive privilege have been claimed on . I am not a position to say that, and i would defer to those individuals, the white house counsel, to make those determinations about what they want to they have not testified not producing those documents on its executive privilege. If they are brought to claim it, they need to claim it quick. On january 13 of this year, president obama signed into law the 2013 intelligence authorization act which requires notification of any disclosure of national intelligence. We have not received any notification of authorized disclosures. Have there been any authorized disclosures, to your knowledge . Since you have not received any notification, there have not been. Would you consider the information reported about the cameras and playback an authorized disclosure . I do not know which piece youre talking about. There has much discussion in the media and in the newspapers about this. I do not know specifically about any classified information. The fact that the Administration May be going through a process to institutionalize our processes and procedures in an of itself is not a classified issue. Those details that are classified, i do not know of any that came out in some of those reports. If there is classified information that is out there, and it was not authorized, was there a crime report filed relative to the play book . Presumably there was, senator. Those decisions as far as initiating investigations are done by those agencies that have stewardship of that information. In discussions with the department of justice, to make a determination whether or not unlike of the fact that maybe some many people have access to it, how they can proceed with criminal investigations. As we prepare for the closed hearing on monday on tuesday i will ask you today that you be prepared to provide for the committee any specific discussions that you have where you are authorized to reveal classified information or to talk about information on covert action, not something i would like to do today. The answer may be zero. If there are things tuesday, it would be an opportunity to provide. That was a question from a prehearing question that was unanswered. My last question is i am still not clear on whether you think the information from cia interrogations saves lives. Have you ever made a representation to a court, including a fisa court, but the type and importance of information learned from detainees . The first question, if i believe there was that information whether i was clear. All i am not clear at this time because i read a report that calls into question a lot of information that i was provided earlier on. When i was in the government as the head of National Counterterrorism center, i know that i had signed out a number of affirmations related to the continuation of certain programs based on the analysis and intelligence that was available. I do not know exactly what it was at the time, but we can look at that. But the committee can assume that you had faith if you make that claim to a court, you had faith in the documents and in the information that was supplied you to make that declaration . Absolutely. If i made such an affirmation, i would have faith that the information provided was an accurate representation. Thank you very much. Thank you, senator, very much. Thank you, senator. We have talked for several hours now about the question of targeted killings of americans, and you have heard it from a number of senators. I would like to get your reaction on one point in particular. That is this question, particularly in the concept you have given, that you have tried to focus on areas where the evidence is substantial, the threat is imminent, where there is a particularly persuasive case, that the targeted killing of americans is warranted. In that kind of case, do you believe that the president should provide an individual american with the opportunity to surrender before killing them . I have not spoken about any specific operations i am talking about the concept because you talk about the concept. Imminent threats, serious evidence, grave concern, and certainly words that strike, according to me, and that is why i would be interested in your thoughts weather in those kinds of instances the president ought to give, should give, individual americans the opportunity to surrender. Thats use the example of al qaeda, because if an american were to join al qaeda, we have said, openly, repeatedly, that we are at war with al qaeda. We have set out kind that is trying to kill americans, and that we will do Everything Possible to protect the lives of american citizens from these murderous attacks. We have signaled this worldwide. We repeatedly have said it openly. Any american he joins al qaeda will know full well that they have joined an authorization that is at war with the United States and has killed thousands upon thousands of individuals, many of whom were americans. In american who did that should know well that they in fact are part of an enemy against us and that the United States will do Everything Possible to destroy that enemy to save american lives. And i certainly, and i said this at the very beginning, i certainly want to be part of that effort to fight al qaeda on all of these key fronts. I just want to have some answers, and i will give you another chance, whether you think the president should give an individual american a chance to surrender . I think senator king talked about the idea, and i commend you for saying you are open to hearing about that. This is something that can be set in motion in a straightforward way as a general principle, and i am not talking about any one individual, and you have answered the question, and i will not go any further, unless you want to add anything to it. The other point i would say is we have covered a lot of ground today, and as far as im concerned, we have got a lot of ground still to cover. I have made it clear that we have got to see any and all of those legal opinions, once that a Bipartisan Group of senators asked for, before the vote at your credit you said you would take the message back to the white house. Because what it really goes to, mr. Brennan, is this question of checks and balances. And we probably did not use that word and off this afternoon, because i think that is really what this is all about. A constitution gives the president the significant power to protect our country, and dangerous times, unfettered power. It is power that is balanced through this special system that ensures a congressional oversight, and that is why these questions that i and others have tried to get at in terms of congressional oversight, being able to get all of the opinions that are relevant to the legal analysis for targeting americans, and then to learn more about how you are going to bring the public into the discussion. Certainly you have been patient this afternoon, and i want you to know we have covered a lot of ground, but i think we have a lot to go. Any member of al qaeda, a u. S. Citizen or not, needs to know they have the ability to surrender anytime, anywhere throughout the world, and they can do so before their organization is to strike. We will destroy that organization, and u. S. Citizens can surrender anytime. Just on that point, i do not take a back seat to anybody in terms of citing al qaeda. I asked you a different question, and on the question of what kind of evidence ought to be applied, whether there ought to be geographic limits, the question of whether an individual should be allowed to surrender. For example, there is a question of whether the obligation changes, a valid target has not been publicly reported, so there are issues here, and i think we are going to have to continue discussions, and, madam, i look forward to the extra round. Senator coats. I think it may be better held for further discussion next week in the classified room, but this whole idea of leaks, nothing upsets me more in this committee, and we have had a lot of these in the last few years, to see something that was discussed in classified areas, written up the next day in the newspapers or on the part of the media, and it drives some of us crazy. It does me, anyway. So maybe i am paranoid about all this and so forth. I cannot totally get my hands around this al qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula situation which we discussed earlier, but i will defer that until tuesday so we can discuss in more detail. That may just ask you one question here. You said i do not have the date the al qaeda core has been dissipated. We see this thing metastasizing now across Northern Africa and other parts. What is your latest assessment of al qaeda in terms of its control and operation of these smaller efforts that are popping up in different parts of the middle east and north africa . In the past i think the core asserted an amount of the influence over the franchises. It depends on our definition of the core and our ability to disrupt communication between them. Aqap, other elements, have developed as a result of the local environment. They are unique unto themselves. We need to make sure that we are able to work with the governments and Intelligence Service is so we can put pressure on them. And number of them have local agendas, and some of them have international agendas. Aqap in yemen has a effort underway to bring that government down, and the government has done a great job. There are other elements, narcotics smugglers, human traffickers, they involve kidnappings and ransoms, and are involved in terrorist attacks. We need to take into account what the informant is, who we can work with, how to put pressure on them, but any element associated with al qaeda has as part of its agenda death and destruction. I agree but we need to do is be mindful of this metastasization of the al qaeda cancer. In relationship to some kind of centralized control over all these things and having said that the core is decimated, it really varies. We see the al qaeda core exerting control over these elements. There is a lot of independence of effort come autonomous efforts that are underway, and i will be happy to talk and concession about the relationships that exist between al qaeda cores. Thank you very much, senator. Senator collins. Thank you, madam chairman. Mr. Brennan, i want to follow up on the point that senator coats just raised, because if you look at a map, back in 2001, you would see that al qaeda was mainly in afghanistan and pakistan. If you look at a map today, you would see al qaeda in all sorts of countries. That is not to say that there were not cells and other countries back in 2001, but it raises the question in my mind of whether, even though we have been successful in taking out some of the core of al qaeda and some highlevel leaders, whether our strategy is working. If the cancer of al qaeda it is metastasizing, do we need a new treatment . What we have tried to do over the past decade and longer is to be able to treat this real cancer in a number of ways. Sometimes it takes lethal force, military might, working with our partners in a variety of ways, addressing some of the infrastructural institutional and other disease that exist in these countries that al qaeda takes advantage of. If you look at the geographic map from south asia the middle east and north africa, there has been tremendous political turbulence in that area over the past decade, and particularly in the last couple years. There are a lot of uncovered spaces that outcry has taken advantage of. We have made progress in some areas. Somalia is in fact a good example of a place where we have worked with neighboring countries, local government, with a multilateral element in africa, to try to supress them. It is not just a kinetic solution. As we l