So the security conditions are difficult enough. That's no excuse for the pledges not being fulfilled, is it?

A decision of that magnitude which has had such implications and such ramifications surely should have involved our top military leadership.

The al Qaeda leadership structure that we charted after September 11 is seriously damaged, but that the group remains as committed as ever to attacking the U.S. homeland.

Well, then why don't we budget for it? This isn't in the middle of combat.

It seems to me that it is a responsibility of this committee and the similar committee on the House to understand that impact.

I think our responsibility is a heavy one here for the future well-being of this country as well as for any accountability and responsibility in the past.

But have you urged that the supplemental be filed before the end of the year...

The total request is more than $10 billion and that's for 1 fiscal year.

Are they engaged in OT&E, in your judgment, as defined by law, at this time?

It would be a change if that is approved.

Mr. Christie, will the tests that are scheduled between now and the September 2004 deployment all have essentially the same highly scripted engagement geometry which has been used in prior flight tests?

How do you plan to circumvent these safety restrictions in order to launch from Fort Greeley?

Would you let the committee know, then, about what your thinking is on that as it evolves?

I strongly support the President's decision.

the President announced that he intended to deploy this system in 2004.

The law says that you must do operational testing before you proceed beyond low rate initial production.

Just to make sure that they are working 24-7?

I'm glad you're willing to take a fresh look at that.