CNN "State of the Union with Candy Crowley" - Transcript - National Security: Counterterrorism and Cybersecurity
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
CROWLEY: Joining me now is Congressman Michael McCaul. He is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and a member of the intelligence committee, although I'm not sure that's right. Congressman, you sit on the intelligence committee?
MCCAUL: I don't, but it would be nice to.
CROWLEY: OK. Well, you know, I just gave you a promotion. I just read that and thought I don't think that's right. OK.
(LAUGHTER)
CROWLEY: Now that we have that corrected, let me -- I have to tell you when I saw your statement in response to the president's speech, I thought it was pretty tough. The Obama administration's return to a pre-9/11 counterterrorism mindset puts American lives at risk. So, basically, saying the president just put American lives at risk. Specifically, what has he proposed or done or said that makes you think that? MCCAUL: Listen, I think this is the most significant foreign policy address ever given by this president. And at the same time, I found many parts to it disturbing for many reasons. I think the rhetoric sort of defies the reality in terms of the threat level that we've all been briefed on.
I mean, the narrative is sort of that, you know, al Qaeda is on the run. They're defeated, let's claim victory, war's over. And then, let's go back to a pre-9/11 mentality. He actually said that the threat now is what it was before 9/11.
CROWLEY: You know, he did, congressman --
MCCAUL: I couldn't disagree with him more on that.
CROWLEY: I understand that, but that his words. And I know that Republicans have argued, look, this is a global war on terror, al Qaeda's still out there, but the president talked about al Qaeda affiliates that we still had to go after. He talked about targeting networks that would do America harm. He said if we don't get them first, they will kill Americans and I know that.
So, I'm trying to sort of -- I understand that Republicans don't like the rhetoric because they think it downplays the threat, but what about the actual things the president said? Because it didn't -- I'm not sure I heard something that to me says, oh, he's put Americans at risk. So, that's kind of where I was going.
MCCAUL: Sure. And, you know, I watched the speech. You know, core al Qaeda has successfully been denigrated tremendously. And that's a good thing. But I think, again -- and he does talk about the al Qaeda franchises, but he sort of diminishes that threat to the homeland. And I think that's where I take issue with him, because al Qaeda has evolved into a franchise global movement, if you will, that inspires and also is very tactical.
CROWLEY: Sure.
MCCAUL: We've seen, you know, Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood, Libya and Northern Africa. Now, we're looking at Syria, perhaps, Jordan and Saudi could be next. The Arab spring could be turning into a winter that I think poses a great risk to the homeland as well. I will tell you this.
He does talk a tough game about going against in a military way against some of these franchises, but when he calls for repeal of the authorize for use of military force which is what he did, that was what we authorized for 9/11, we authorized the military to go after the terrorist --
CROWLEY: Yes. I have to go back and look at the wording, but I think he called for reworking it. That the basis for the war in Afghanistan -- you know, nonetheless. I get your point.
MCCAUL: I watched it last night to get the specific language. And he does say we need to look at it again, but also repeal. And I think if you repeal that, then -- you know, I'm not for occupying countries. I don't think anybody is right now. But the idea that we can't have a counterterrorism footprint to respond to the future Bin Ladens of the world, I think that's dangerous.
If you're talking about repealing the authorization for the use of military force, then you're basically tying the president's hand on his own, I guess, because he's not going to want to use any special forces to go after any future threats.
CROWLEY: I wanted to ask you a quick question about Guantanamo Bay and the prisoners there. And it's a broader question than do we trust Yemen to keep, if we send some of these prisoners back to Yemen, could they really keep track of them and make sure they don't return to warfare against the U.S.?
And the broader question of what to do with people that you can't put into court because you're worried about sources or you got your information through torture, whatever it is that you think are too dangerous to let loose in the world, what does America do with those people who have neither been tried -- I realize they're not American citizens, but nonetheless, they haven't been charged with anything.
They won't be tried and we don't want to let them loose. Is there a moral dilemma here with just keeping people in perpetuity?
MCCAUL: I think you raise a very serious question. I've been down to Guantanamo. There are 166 very dangerous terrorists down there. I saw Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during his prayer hour and it was very spooky to see the man who killed 3,000 people. Having said that, you know, the president's position was let's just close it down and find a solution to this.
I think the reverse should be true and that is we ought to be trying to find how to deal with them before we close this facility down. He also talked about returning some of these actors to Yemen.
CROWLEY: Right.
MCCAUL: Which we know a quarter to a third of these guys return to the battlefield. And one last thing, Candy, name me one American city that would like to host these guys -- these terrorists in their country? I don't think --
CROWLEY: Well, no one's ever escaped from supermax I think is their response to that. But, you know, I agree that people don't want terrorists in their backyard, but they don't want murderers there either, and sometimes, it just happens.
But let me -- I have to move you quickly on to another subject because I know it's something that concerns you and hits right at your chairmanship and that is these stories out there about Iranian-backed hackers being able to hack in and have sort of alarming ways try to hack into oil and gas companies, electrical companies trying to get to the software in a way that could disrupt the flow of oil and gas, upset the electrical grid or otherwise mess with actually what makes America run.
How high is your fear about what's going on? How certain are you that, in fact, this is backed by the Iranian government?
MCCAUL: Well, it's one of the highest priorities on my radar screen, I would say. We can talk about the kinetic forces, al Qaeda blowing up things like we saw in Boston. But when you talk about cyber, it's a whole new world that's global, anonymous, can hit anywhere in the world. And the fact is Iran did hit -- in the Persian Gulf and wiped out 30,000 hard drives, simultaneously hit our finance sector in the United States.
Our financial sector continues to be under siege every day from Iran. And this, I think it's been publicly reported goes right back to the Iranian government itself. So, this, --
CROWLEY: So, you think they're actively trying to shut down -- you think they're actually trying to shut down our energy supply flow?
MCCAUL: There are three threats with cyber. One is criminal theft. One is espionage from China. They steal everything. Russia, the last threat, is the one that keeps me up at night the most and that is the cyber warfare piece to shut things down. That's what Iran is trying to do right now. And any other rogue nation like Iran that wants to do that, or God forbid, al Qaeda gets hand of this technology that could get into our critical infrastructures, oil and gas, financial sector, you name it, power grids. Yes, you talked about Sandy and Oklahoma and the devastation.
CROWLEY: Uh-huh.
MCCAUL: A cyberattack in the northeast could cause the same impact level that Sandy did in the northeast and shut down the power grid. This is what we're talking about.
CROWLEY: Yes.
MCCAUL: And if Congress fails to act on this, we will have that on our hands.
CROWLEY: Congressman Michael McCaul, chairman of the house Homeland Security Committee. Scary stuff. Come back and we will talk more about it when you're back in Washington. Thank you.
MCCAUL: Thank you, Candy.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source