Combating Terrorism: A Proliferation of Strategies, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations of the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, First Session, March 3, 2003 [open pdf - 6MB]
From the opening statement of Christopher Shays: "Almost 2 years before the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, far more widely and succinctly known as the Gilmore Commission, concluded the United States lacked a coherent, functional national strategy to guide disparate counterterrorism efforts. In testimony before the subcommittee on March 26, 2001, the Commission's vice chairman said, 'a truly comprehensive national strategy will contain a high-level statement of national objectives coupled logically to a statement of the means used to achieve these objectives'. The Bush administration inherited a loose collection of Presidential directives and law enforcement planning documents used as a strategic framework, but that fragile construct collapsed with the World Trade Center on September 11th. The brutal nature of the terrorist threat shattered naive assumptions terrorists would be deterred by geographic, political, or moral borders. A new strategic paradigm was needed. Containment, deterrence, reaction and mutually assured destruction no longer served to protect the fundamental security interest of the American people. The threat demands detection, prevention, and a proactive, preemptive approach to self-defense." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Raymond Decker, James S. Gilmore, Andrew F. Krepinevich, Dennis J. Kucinich, John Newhouse, Michael E. O'Hanlon, and Christopher Shays.
Serial No. 108-20
Government Printing Office, Congressional Hearings: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/chearings/index.html