while karzai had to survive while he was being neglected, he is a pashtun. however, he is a peaceful one. his father was a parliamentarian. he himself is not pocketing money, or whatever. host: we're going to let it go there and let john newman reply. guest: i know we are short on time. it is crucial and my son talked to me about all the time how important it is, and the soldiers know that, to treat the local population while group a lot of their medics were training kids from the -- were treating kids from the village who were being hurt by the mortars from the taliban who could not shoot them very well. and we are expanding considerably the civilian effort t. host: how does that compare with vietnam? guest: we suffered in the early years of the war for not having paid attention to that. host: jon newman teaches courses in soviet, chinese, and east asian history. this is his book. you can try to track and online. thanks for being with us this morning. that will about do it for washed -- for "washington journal" this morning. we will be back at 7:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow. have a great day. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] . . >> she received nearly 54% of the vote in a runoff last month. for live coverage of the inauguration, we will have it in half an hour. right now, a seminar on coalition building an issue campaigns. live coverage continues throughout the day. tonight, on the communicators, president of the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers. it is a nonprofit agency responsible for managing internet names and addresses. now available, c-span2 book, abraham lincoln. a great read for any history buff. it is a unique and contemporary perspective on lincoln. for lincoln's early years until his life in the white house and his relevance today. abraham lincoln, in hard cover at your favorite book seller. more and more at cspan.org. >> live coverage of the houston mayors inauguration's. up until that time, a look at this morning's "washington journal." security changes after the terrorist attack on northwest flight 253. scheuer founded the cia counter-terrorism center, the osama bin laden unit, in 1996. here to talk to us this morning about terrorism in the wake of the flight 253 incident. overall, what do we know about the strength of al qaeda as compared to 9/11? even before that, in 1996? guest: they have a much larger geographical reach than they did originally. they have a functioning wing in yemen, one in fourth africa, and even somalia and north africa. -- north africa, and even somalia. on the face of it, it seems that they are wrong in reporting that they have not expanded. host: we see reports about what we are doing to prevent people from entering. we read about and see the launches of creditor drones against al qaeda operatives. what are we not doing that we should be doing? guest: what we have seen is definitive proof that there is such a thing, on any topic, that killing these people one at a time is not sufficient. it was not sufficient in 1995 and is far less so now, as there are so many people in the muslim world that are mad at america. very few muslims hate americans for being americans. in terms of airports, the watch word is not a silver bullet. if anything, this gentleman in detroit was a rank amateur. had he been a professional, it would not have the nabobs of job. for americans to somehow think that we have a great system to protect them, i think that is wrong. i think sometimes i wonder why we spend so much attention on the aircraft and system when we have 3000 or 4,000 miles of open sea borders. host: going back to your comment from a moment ago about the u.s. killing al qaeda one of the time, what should we do, does that mean a bigger military presence in places like yemen? guest: we are at the drawing board. we have not progressed since 9/11. we are fighting an enemy that basically does not exist. the american people, for the last four presidents, continued to tell americans that we are fighting an enemy that is motivated by hatred for freedom and our liberties. women in the workplace. liquor after the work day. therefore, there are a fanatic, a limited number of folks. nothing could be further far -- from the truth. host: what are they motivated by? guest: our foreign policy. we have supported dictators. we have supported the police state of saudi arabia that governs a jordan, egypt, and algeria. we give unqualified support to the israelis. these other motivations of the enemy. this is not to say that those policies are wrong. we all have our own opinions on that. certainly i would move to change some of them. but the idea that you do not recognize what your enemies motivation is for political reasons, you will never be read on who you are fighting. host: yemeni leadership, in the cross hairs of al qaeda -- that was from this morning's "washington times." there is a vacuum if we do not support, but you are saying that one of the reasons that al qaeda is fighting there is this? guest: they are an unusual enemy, often when we do something, it is win-win for them. for example, we did not have an airplane explode on christmas day. but 80% of what they were aiming for was successful. they terrorized the american people, seized the air-traffic system, causing the united states to spend much more money on screening and personnel. suggesting again to the american people that their government cannot protect them. these are choices between bad actions. host: let's hear from one of the callers. ernest, good morning. independent line. caller: sir, i want to find out if you are one of the good cia guys. you say we are not -- you say that we are fighting an enemy that does not exist. al qaeda is a name that we gave them, they did not give it to themselves. i do not know how in tune you are with the last attempt of a terrorist attack. could you explain to the people what a false flag operation is? then i would like to know this -- during the reporting of the past terrorist attack, eyewitness accounts have been suppressed. we are talking about the well- dressed gentleman that helped the accused hijacker or bomber to get on the plane, past security, by passing it all with no passport, no identification, no visa. we are talking about the gentleman that was on the flight the entire time. host: michael scheuer? guest: i do not know how the idea has grown that there is no such thing as al qaeda. there was -- they are an organization that formed in 1988. it is a sophisticated organization and to say that it does not exist is mostly in the realm of the social scientists that would like to define the problem away rather than confront it. host: you wrote last week that the obama prescription for defeating al qaeda maintains continuity with of the failed and stubbornly ignore an approach that washington has stubbornly adhered to since 1996. what is the failed approach? guest: maintaining that these are an isolated and small number of people in the muslim world, they have hijacked islam. that is not true. polls show that 80% of the world's muslims agree with the osama bin laden in his view that american foreign policy is an attack on their faith. even a small portion of that is a lot of people for americans to be fighting. host: with numbers like that, how can any administration have affected partners in places like saudi arabia? guest: they cannot be. we want to believe that we have an effective partners, but the reality is that those governments need to pay fealty to the muslims fighting the united states. those same muslims threaten their stability. host: mclean, virginia. republican line. go ahead. caller: first of all, i have seen you lecture at fort bragg before the house arms committee. i agree with everything you have said in each form. my question to you, when is the intelligence community going to start coordinating with each other? i was a former counter-terrorism intelligence officer until six weeks ago. i was arrested on september 14, 2009, because i was provided a user name and password to individual in the intelligence community not widely known in the united states. to make it simple, i dreaded of the judicial branch's monitoring of this individual -- treaded on the judicial branch's monitoring of this individual. when is the nsa billing to coordinate with the judicial branch, i.e. fbi? guest: i do not know what the answer is to that. i know that unfortunately the intelligence reform bills pushed through the congress, very few congressmen actually read it. it expanded the intelligence community from 16 units to 18 units. as a result it has created a greater bureaucracy. we still have computer systems that are not shared across the system. i am told that we sometimes have three or four different cpu's under their desks in order to have contact with different agencies. personally i think that nothing short of another attack on the short of another attack on the united states is guest: certainly, the leadership has not been inspiring. caller: good morning. i would like to know, how can we as americans stop someone who is willing to put a device on themselves and blow themselves up and others. i would like to know how we can stop it. guest: i do not think there is a way to stop it with any 100% assuredness. one way to stop it is to decrease the motivation of those people who attacked us. until we are willing to recognize what the basis of their motivation is, which is things like support like israel, support like the saudi police state, we are not going to be able to stop any of them or many of them. the number of people willing to carry those devices will increase over time. ultimately, we have to find a way to dissuade them from focusing their anger on us and persuade them to focus their anger on what they themselves believe is the real enemy, the governments that govern them, oppress them, and israel. and israel. host: last week "the washington times" wrote about a couple that was sent to a saudi rehabilitation program, that used dialogue and art therapy to rehabilitate the militants. 85 of the most wanted work released, 11 were graduates of that program. yesterday, the president of the counter-terrorism direction, reporting "obama moving ahead with repatriation of yemeni prisoners." he made the comment that the administration policy would not have changed -- i wanted to play this for you. i wanted to get your thoughts. >> let's get this into context. during this administration we transferred 42. seven of those have gone back to yemen. the first one went a few weeks ago. we have had close dialogue with the yemeni government about the expectations that we have as far as what they are supposed to do. several of those detainees were put into yemeni custody right away. we are trying to do this in a very measured fashion. the guantanamo facility must be closed. we are determined to close it. we are not going to do anything that is going to put american security and rest. working closely with the yemeni government, we are looking at the detainee's and we are going to take the right steps above we will lead to anything to put americans at risk. host: has the release of those prisoners been a success? guest: certainly, it has not. first, this idea that he raised the guantanamo has been a propaganda victory for al qaeda is nonsense. how can you compare guantanamo to prisons that are run by the algerian generals? certainly the muslim world does not like guantanamo, but to think that that is a major grievance is wrong. mr. obama is closing guantanamo because it pleases the europeans and it pleases the left wing of his party. there is no other possible reason than that. in terms of releasing these people to these rehabilitation programs of the arab government, saudis, yemeni, they have all worked very hard since 9/11 to insulate themselves from criticism after the next attack on the united states. . i am tired of all these people pointing counties. and the other stations, pushing us to go to war with the muslim friends. they are willing to spend the last drop of american blood and treasure to get their way in the world. they have too much power in this country. people like wolfowitz, the other neocons, that brought us into iraq, and now we are going to spend 60 years rehabilitating our soldiers. host: any comment? guest: of course, american policy is up to the american people. one thing we have not discussed is our policy toward the israelis. whether we want to be involved in fighting in their wars in the future is something americans should be able to talk about. they may vote yes. but the question is we need to talk about it. ultimately, is real is a country of no strategic worth to the u.s. they have no resources we need, their manpower is minimal. their association with us is a negative for the indicted states. that is a fact, and what you want to do about that is different. for anyone to say that our support does not hurt us in the muslim world is to justify a reality. host: richard on the republican line. good morning. caller: i would like to hear an answer to the first caller. that well-dressed man brought that person up to the counter without a passport. him and his wife are lawyers. host: you are breaking up a little bit, richard. michael, have you heard about this? guest: the man came from a rich family. it could have been a diplomat assisting him. i do not have the answer to that. host: john brennan was asked about this attempt to try him in courts as opposed to a military tribunal. this is what he had to say. >> we have an array of tools and we want to make sure we maintain flexibility in how we deal with individuals. he was arrested on u.s. soil in detroit. he was talking to people. there were people arrested in the previous administration -- richard reid, moussaoui, and others -- all of which were charged and sentenced to life in prison. just because someone is put through the legal process does not mean that we do not have other opportunities to get information from them. >> after abdulmutallab got lawyered up, did he stop talking? >> we got information and we continue to have opportunities to do that. as you come to the individuals and they recognize what they are facing, there are opportunities to talk about it. the fbi has some of the best interrogators in the world. i am confident that we will be able to work the system. he knows there are sort of things on the table. if he wants to engage with us, there are ways to do that. >> we still have the right to treat him as an enemy combatant. why not continue to do that? if h@@%@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m @ v if the system is fair, there will be found innocent. he is never going to be found innocent. it is just going to make our judicial system look more fixed, if you will to our opponents. the real answer to this is continuing either prison of -- prisoner of war treatment or enemy combatant treatment. host: what is your sense of having been with the cia, how much can we learn from this? guest: it varies from individual to individual. i have to yield to the general who said that at 1.2 years ago, they had produced 9000 different intelligence reports from these individuals. i know from my own experience, we got very good intelligence from some of the very senior people. to forgo that on the basis of ideology that these people are somehow a law-enforcement problem is probably detrimental to american interest. caller: i have a couple of things i would like to say if i can have the time. sir, i respect what you are saying. earlier you said that american government policy has brought about this hatred toward the american people. the government is responsible for the war in iraq, the alley " -- illegal war in afghanistan. many of the people who were in prison at guantanamo without any kind of process were innocent. how would you feel if you are in prison with no charges, no proof of guilt, six or seven years taken from your family, and that creates more hatred toward this country. basically, it goes to oil. the oil interest, correct me if i am wrong, the way i see it is that when they started bringing oil and we started mucking around with the business of these countries. no wonder people hate us. i think it is misdirected toward innocent americans. this country was founded on slavery and genocide. host: thank you for the input this morning. guest: i think the answer to this is to treat these people as prisoners of war. this is not a war that people have uniforms on, but clearly these are not people who deserve to be put into the legal system and have that kind of right as an american. it is detrimental to our interest. on the second point, i agree with the caller that ultimately, oil is one key to getting us out of where we are. if we had done something 40 years ago, when the oil embargo was first imposed, we would not need to support the tyrannies that govern the arab world. if we were not supporting certain areas, we would have much less animosity from the arab man in the street today. host: you said there was little reason for a farmer support for israel, but could you say the same for countries in europe? the fact that they are democracies, fledgling democracies in some case, is that not a strategic element for the united states? guest: i think that is a fallacy. what does it matter if a country is a democracy or not? as long as we protect our democracy to the best of our ability, who cares? why should we be committed to war if the russians move against bulgaria? why should we care about that? israel is not the only country that we are committed to with blood and treasure, in a way that is not in america's interests. host: harvey on twitter writes -- is there a saudi and in any of this? guest: i do not know but they are probably the most dangerous government to the united states. they are one of the most powerful lobbies in washington. the idea that somehow we are the boss and that relationship is incorrect. when i was running operations against the usama bin laden, they continually refused to help us. they do not mind terrorism as long as it does not happen in the >> we will go live to houston, texas, for the inauguration of the new mayor annise parker. introductions about to be made. you're watching live coverage now on c-span. >> i am so honored to be part of this historic inauguration. at this time, it is my pleasure to introduce to you your 2010 city of houston elected official. please welcome to the stage the honorable council member elect accompanied by her father. [applause] councilmember district be accompanied by his wife. the honorable council member district c, accompanied by her son. the honorable one that adams, accompanied by her brother. the honorable mike sullivan, accompanied by his wife. the honorable council member elect district f, accompanied by his wife. the honorable oliver pennington, the district g., accompanied by his wife. the honorable edward gonzales, accompanied by his wife. the honorable james rodriguez, accompanied by his wife. the honorable stephen castillo, accompanied by his wife. the honorable council member at large, a company by her life partner. -- accompanied by her life partner. the honorable council member at large, position three, accompanied by her husband. the honorable brad bradford, accompanied by his wife. the honorable council member at large, position five, accompanied by her son. the honorable city comptroller, accompanied by his wife. the honorable annise parker, mayor of the city of houston, accompanied by her life partner. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, we are fortunate to have several former mayors joining us on stage. i will ask them to stand as they're being introduced. the honorable kathryn whitmire, the honorable bob lanier and his wife. the honorable leave brown and his wife. --