[speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] >> the united states is the biggest developed economy in the world. the united states has a strong based economy, it has advanced science and technology and a large well-trained labor force. we have the confidence that the united states will overcome the difficulties and achieve a full economic recovery. we hope that the united states will take the right economic policy, maintain fiscal and financial stability and keeps the confidence of the investors and ensure the interests of global investors. in my meeting with the president barack obama last year, i proposed to him that china and the united states engage in large scale financial economic

cooperation. two elements are essential in this proposal. first if the united states should open its market to the chinese companies so that china will turn from just buy u.s. bonds to making investment in the u.s. market and that will help generate more jobs in the united states. second, the u.s. should increase its exports to china and the current problem actually lies with the united states, and to resolve the problem the u.s. needs to lift its export restrictions. i recall a remark made by the former secretary of commerce gary locke of the united states. he said that if the u.s. imports from east asian countries increased by one percentage point that will help generate an additional 100,000 job opportunities in the united states. my proposal was well received by

the president, and i hope that in this positive way china and the united states can work together to address their trade imbalance and enhance trade and economic cooperations. >> [speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese] y [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] >> and the e.u. is china's comprehensive partner we have followed closely the economic development in the european countries and the difficulties some european countries have encountered. when some european countries have suffered from the sovereign debt crisis we have on many occasions expressed our readiness to extend a helping hand and our readiness to increase our investment in europe. not long ago we had a telephone conversation with president

barrasso of the european commission. in my discussion with him i once again made it jury clear that china is confident that the e.u. will overcome the current difficulties and china is willing to invest more in european countries. at the same time, we hope that the leaders of the key members of the european union will take a bold steps and a yield with china with a strategic vision that is we believe they should recognize china's market economy. as a matter of fact according went to the growth china will be recognized as a free-market economy at 2016 internationally and to show my sincerity on this issue a few years ahead of that time is the way friend treats another friend. next month i'm going to hold a summit with of the leaders.

i hope that there will be some breakthroughs at the upcoming china e.u. summit. >> [speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese]

[speaking mandarin chinese] [speaking mandarin chinese] [applause] >> japan is china's close neighbor, the economies of the two countries are highly complementary. the total trade between china and japan takes up a large proportion of the total trade of each country. japan has encountered the difficulty caused by the tsunami national and natural disaster and the nuclear incident, yet we believe that japan will have a new round of the upward economic growth in the course of the post

disaster recovery and reconstruction. when japan is in difficulty, china has extended a helping hand in terms of economic trade corporations and tourism. at the same time, we must not forget the difficulties facing the vast number of developing countries. they are the ones that have suffered the most in the economic crisis. they face unprecedented challenges in terms of growing their economy and tackling inflation. they need the help from the international community. not long ago we had extended food aid to some african countries on two occasions, and we have provided human assistance to some west asian and north african countries that have experienced turbulence. and towards the international community must work in concert with the spirit of solidarity in tackling the crisis and meeting

the challenges, and that is the spirit that china will apply in working with other countries to meet all the challenges. thank you. >> we thank very much for this for a comprehensive presentation of the challenges and all of the solutions in when the future of economic development in china. i would say you have shown the audience since china and barked into its policy the solution has always been followed by implementation period.

it shows us if we have the will to overcome the challenges we can do so. and i would like to make this meeting a kind of turning point in how we look at the future will. we should look at the future with optimism. if we apply our capabilities particularly our entrepreneurial, our innovative capabilities, i think china will continue to succeed in its path to a grand prosperous responsible cooperative nation in the world come into the world will be capable to solve its problems and together we will have a more peaceful world with strong and as you mentioned strong, balanced and sustainable development. thank you again and i would like

to integrate into the thanks also our partners share in china the done national development reform commission industry we are grateful for this partnership and we are particularly grateful that for the first time you have opened this. thank you. [applause]

the topic of the constitution in a few open to middle and high school students $50,000 in prizes. the deadline for submission is in january you can get all the details now at studentcam.org. british and secretary of theresa may said efforts in england have british intelligence had signs of radical. it remarks on the council on foreign relations in washington d.c., may commented on efforts to encourage the british muslim community to speak out against terrorism. this is one hour.

>> good afternoon everyone. welcome. i'm the bureau chief for cbs news in washington. we are very lucky today to have the secretary the honorable theresa may joining us. she will be discussing counterterrorism and the strategy by both the u.k. and the work that they do with our government to combat terrorism globally. here we have a detailed biography i believe in your packet but quite briefly, she is the home secretary for women in the quality, the position she was appointed to in may of 2010. she was elected before that in may of 1997 as a member of parliament from the conservative party and served in the parliament of until the point she was appointed to the home secretary. she served as a member of the cabinet from 1999 until may of

2010. she will be discussing terrorism and counterterrorism input we will have a brief discussion after her remarks and open up to the floor for questions. please welcome the secretary. [applause] >> thank you very much and it's free good to join you here today. the tenth anniversary of 9/11 is a time for reflection. a time to remember those who lost their lives, but also to reflect on the terrorist threat but we still face on the lessons we've learned and on the challenges ahead. we know the terrorist threats we face changed significantly over the past ten years. al qaeda is now substantially weaker than it has been since 9/11. u.s. military and intelligence operations, the international

effort in afghanistan with pakistan and many other countries are all key factors. al qaeda has left its people from its facilities, its action and much of its support and a reputation. this is a considerable achievement and we should be thankful for it. but we need to be realistic about the threats that remain. in the u.k. we continue to arrest a very significant numbers of people for terrorist offenses. almost 2,000 since 9/11 to over 650 in the past two years alone. this is more than other countries in europe. the leadership of al qaeda continues to plan operations in the u.k.. the attract people for training. the sections dedicated to overseas operations, radicalized and recruit. and even with the capability of the al khaleej tauscher produced the other threats have emerged which in the u.k. affect us directly. we have seen a wide range of terrorist groups active in and

from pakistan. some are new but rapidly growing. others are well established. we now pay more attention to the al qaeda affiliate's in yemen and in all of africa in particular. these affiliate's of independent capability. they can radicalize people in our country. people are traveling to fight in somalia with al-shabaab and al qaeda and training young men. some aspire to conduct attacks back home. we remain alert and spreading out of iraq watching with concern that service planning and plotting in nigeria and elsewhere in sub-saharan africa. and of course we know that as the command and control of a tax al qaeda seeks to inspire the loan acts of terror but some organized and conducted without its guidance or instruction. the new terrorist threats are no less complex and difficult than the old and in some ways they are harder to deal with.

the challenge our systems and structures. terrorism now is more diverse, decentralized and perhaps also the more agile than the landscape of 9/11. in the u.k. we also face a significant threat from terrorism in northern ireland. in 2010, almost three times as many people were arrested for terrorist offenses in northern ireland as international terrorist offenses across the u.k.. we had 40 attacks in 2010 and 16 by the end of june this year. the tragic events in oslo this summer have reconsidered the threat to the extreme right. this is much less widespread and systematic than the terrorism associated with al qaeda but it has a strange symbiotic relationship with extreme islamism. they feed and often fight off each other. our counterterrorism peace and our strategy were already addressing this threat after oslo we have reallocated the further resources to this work.

in the last decade we've learned a great deal about effective counterterrorism. because the response requires the closest correlation between policing and the security of the intelligence agencies much closer than they may have imagined ten years ago this response needs to be dispersed around the country and the central command that integrated into the local policing and closed to the communities which it aims to protect. the network needs to join seamlessly with what we have come to call hour upstream response. our efforts overseas to stop attack planning against the u.k. and until very recently almost all of the attacks planned against the u.k. had been organized and structured overseas connection. we also know that successful counterterrorism needs to be more wide ranging and wider in scope than we first thought. it must include not only to devotees to investigate and prosecute, but also to prevent or to counter radicalization to

provide protective security and establish community and states would then. that involves the hall of government to work on the community integration, diplomacy, counter proliferation, foreign aid, and of course the military operations, and it needs to be local, national and international. to the state and non-state actors the government's overseas industries and communities at home. the very complexity of this task, the number of moving parts requires careful coordination and a genuine strategic approach. shortly before the summer both of the u.s. and the u.k. launch new counterterrorism strategies. they both look forward to taking account of these lessons in different ways. they also describe the threats we face using comparable terms and language. that is important because the threats we face seem similar. very soon after line 11 and

certainly by 2005 in the u.k. we realize the terrorist groups have become embedded into the fabric of our society and in particular our cities. they have a complex relationship with non-violent extremists who expressed freedom in our society even if the attack it's very principles. all the time skurfing the law. this terrorism came into the u.k. from outside but it made use of small numbers of british residents and citizens who were already in our country. in america for many years use of the terrorist threat as something external practiced by people who wanted to strike at american citizens over here. the different threat led us to respond in different ways. the response has often been framed by milledge reaction overseas as has been grounded in the police and law enforcement and our own country. the third approach was wrong. in recent years that threat has

been challenged by the experience of the so-called homegrown terrorism and in the u.k. we are clear the domestic law enforcement response alone will not resolve the continued threats we face. our strategies now reflect these common perspectives as the security relationship is grounded not just in an exchange of intelligence but on the collaboration on miniet for areas. we both recognize the need to tackle urgent short-term threat but also titled long-term challenges. today i want to focus on four of these challenges, legal, ideological and technical and on the need to secure our borders. first, looking at the legal challenge. we agree that our counterterrorism work must reflect our core values, respect for human rights and the rule of law. our laws must create the

proportionate necessary and effective. we must use these in ways that are as focused on a targeted and precise as we can make them. both strategies make it clear that the successful prosecution of terrorists is vital and it is our highest priority. but trading strategies is easier than delivering them. it may now be an inevitable features counterterrorism work that we identify more people engaged in terrorist related activities than we can prosecute. intelligence based operations cannot always deliver evidence we can use in court. domestically that causes us problems. in britain we've had to develop the means to restrict the actions of people that we can neither prosecutors nor to port who we know are engaged in terrorist related activities. we must ensure they are always applied in a way consistent with our laws and all use. but the legal challenges

overseas are far greater. in countries where terrorists are most active they are often the least likely to be prosecuted. in these countries, the agencies may not have the skills to investigate terrorist cases. the judicial system may be weak or corrupt or both and the absence of political will. the consequences are far reaching. when we identify terrorist threats we cannot always resolve them. the absence of a functioning judiciary may lead to the violation of human rights. it may then be impossible to cooperate with states in the way that we would wish and we cannot lend a port to these countries' foreign nationals engaged in terrorist activities on our own soil. it is hard to see how we can deal with terrorism in the longer term without better promoting will fall overseas. we are looking to expand our international work around the rule of law and ensure that the agencies have the capabilities

to deutsch of the evidence led investigations into the terrorism. but the challenge outstrips hour own resources. the solution to these problems and others must be international. promoting the rule of law must be the hallmark of the global counterterrorism work in the year to come. the second challenge is ideological. our strategy argues the ideological association of al qaeda may continue to mobilize long terrorists and others long after al qaeda itself is gone. so dealing with the terrorist ideology must be a central part of our overall efforts to defeat terrorism. the strategy is very clear about this. you rightly say that we must always carefully weighed the cost and risks of our actions, recognizing the tactical success can sometimes inadvertently contribute to the strategic dillinger. our counterterrorism work must will give legitimacy to the terrorists. we also agree that we have to demonstrate that the ideology of

those who wish to do less harm is wrong. we must recognize and take on the core of that ideology. but we as countries of war with islami and that this justifies acts of terrorism against us. in the u.k., but terrorists and non-violent extremists support this outlook. the back up this claim by saying that it is unacceptable for the muslims to proceed in a democracy and that indeed it is wrong for the muslims and non-muslims to live alongside and associate with one another in an integrated content and cohesive society. we will deal with those who promote terrorism through the criminal justice system. we will prevent extremists operating freely in our schools, universities and prisons. we are not to be an extremist groups operating just within our law but we let them pass unchallenged and extremists of whatever kind come into our country to preach hatred under division. but there are limits to what the

governments can do. it is vital to in power the communities to contest these issues. muslims living in the countries to invest disprove the claims made about them. we've been struggling for freedom across the middle east and north africa and have shown that the political change does not depend on acts of terror and the air of spring al qaeda has been irrelevant. in its ideological struggle we must recognize the role of the internet. the internet as a but it's not only the terms of how planning and recruitment but also radicalization and the circulation of the extremist ideology. we know the terrorists and extremists use of the internet is becoming more sophisticated. and we know that much of the extremist material that concerns us is posted overseas including here. we are determined in the u.k. that the internet must not be the noteco area for government but terrorists and extremists

can proceed unhindered. we've encouraged the development of a specialist police unit responsible for enforcing the removal of material which is unlawful under our legislation. that unit has international reached since it started the unit has removed material on over 170 occasions. we've also developed the new facility which more easily and as the public to refer unlawful or offensive material they've identified to web hosting companies. when the speech as their own conditions of use which it often does, they will remove it. ..

we continue to see little evidence of systematic cyberterrorism, but this is not part of the language of al qaeda. as a tack tick, cyberterrorism is perfectly to the world that the lawn terrace, operating without traditional command-and-control. collectively, these are very significant issues for us and our allies.

the pacing availability of technology has potential to compensate for progress we've made since 9/11. it can make the ideological struggle with a relative. technology you get much where lethal power to many fewer people. a great deal has been done to address these threats. you have again taken the lead on counter proliferation around the world. we've both develop solutions to do with the rigid tactical threat overture that technology, but we have much more to do. we've been a much clear shared idea of how to eligible change terrorism nurse for good. we need to nurture the academic links between their two countries to find solutions in the future. we will need to develop new and rather different relationships with our private areas who of course on much of this technology and new for a wider benefit will develop as aggressively as they can.

let me turn finally to one of the most striking achievement since 9/11, the improvement of security at borders and for aviation in particular. i use the term striking because of the complexity and scale of the task covered because it has been achieved and also continued rapid expansion traveled around the world card because it is required global cooperation and because it has retained support of the vast majority of the traveling public. the u.s. and department of homeland security have led the way. we've developed a dialectic at their coach is vital to national security and counterterrorist efforts. it is given a new meaning to the term border security and perhaps to the term border itself. in future come of this work will get more challenging. right now, 200 million passengers traveled by air to arthur country each air from some 465 departures around the

world. by 2030 the number would've risen to around 390 million. we know the common feature of the threats we face is a terrorist increasingly operate across state, traveling and networking freely. we know the anti-kerry lethal material, either with the intent to use it in mid air for the destination. we also have the border security to consider the extent depends on border security and other states, often less capable than ourselves. it depends on the collection, exchange and analysis of large amounts of data. within the u.k. come would denigrate joe to strengthen borders. working on technical programs that will be setting up a border police command. by looking at your customs and border protection which offers lessons for us. we are also working closely within the european union and other countries to develop passenger data sharing arrangements -- agreements.

i secured it agree with you but that is vital to our security. there's often talk of the value of our intelligence exchange and that's of course absolutely right. the exchange of data on border security may be far less clearance, but it's no less important or if the date. in the u.s. alone, you've used the analysis of travel data to identify 3000 people since i could've terrace connections over two years. countries around the world must commit to developing international consensus on the secure borders, common capabilities and sharing data. we know and we share technology, new ideas and expertise and we must do so, too. as we look back to 9/11, we rightly point to achievement and containing an reducing the threats we face. looking forward we see threats will continue to change,

dispersed organization and individuals make more use of different technologies. they'll test our law enforcement and intelligence capabilities. at the 9/11 commission warned us, we'll have to use their imagination to anticipate future trends. terrorism in 2015 is likely to be very different from terrorism today. success will depend on balancing the near and long-term object is. repeated tactical success will not in itself assures the strategic victory. we must extend the rule of law, address the ideological challenge, harness and not be harmed by technology and preserve our borders and what will surely remain a period of instability. in that period of instability, one thing must remain stable, the strength of the u.k. u.s. security relationship. its scope will change, its importance will not. the security of our citizens and

the wider world depends on it. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. i should've said at the out that at this session is on the record , so i'll begin by asking a few questions of the secretary and it will open up to the floor. please do turnoff but tories. he made reference at the outset that the al qaeda had taken some hits obviously by the killing of osama bin laden and subsequently by another senior al qaeda operatives the other day. musharraf is sorry, head of operations for al qaeda. how seriously do you think the core al qaeda has been damaged by these military operations?

>> the core has been damaged very significantly by this operation. as i say, but probably now faces a greater diversity in terms of threat from the al qaeda affiliate elsewhere. there's no doubt that core has been significantly damaged. the >> using the core is capable of carrying out a major operation? >> i think we must assume the core is capable of testing, planning and so forth and it is wise to plan and prepare on that basis. but i think what has happened of course over the recent years in particular now would be very significant changes is that we not only have a look at that core. it's the standard problem that when you've got one substantial area of threat you can look at and prepare for some kinds of

easier to do that than have to deal with the number of diverse threats. we have to accept their diverse threats around the world and increasing areas of parents. obviously we've been talking about areas like aqap coming in and i'll shut bob in yemen for some time. countries like nigeria. >> you mention al qaeda in the arabian tenet, shorthand aqap. last october of 2010 they believe your authorities accepted a shipment from yemen at the east midlands airport, which intelligence indicated contained an explosive device, which came before the united states and stopped over in east midlands. upon inspection, no explosive device with the type to. i believe it took several hours and they had to go back. how did that happen?

how did the inspectors in authorities on the ground not detect that advice? >> well, i think we have to understand what we are dealing with are terrorists that becomes more sophisticated interfaces they prepare if it's a challenge, part of the technological challenges making sure that we can find ways of increasing their ability to detect and increasing, obviously the whole question of cargo security is part of that as well as the question of security on passenger planes. >> is a specific incident or event intelligence. were you surprised that the inspection didn't detect that? recent price at the level of

sophistication of that particular advice? what did i tell you about the individuals making explosive devices these days? >> what it tells us is a genocide as they are more sophisticated in what they do. terrorists can learn from before as indeed the counterterrorism and law enforcement agencies have learned from what has come before. >> last year there was a major alert, which we all heard about both in this country in europe that there was a pending attack on europe and apparently the intelligence was very good and everybody was quite high alert for some time. and then it just kind of evaporated. can you give us any insight into at the end of the day a year later, with the assessment was at that particular one? >> in a sense, the world of joining counterterrorism is the world but there's a number of

threats or number attack -- potential of plaque country attacks planned in response needed to does an assessment of credibility incapability and sometimes obviously thankfully proved not to be -- i wouldn't say credible or valued in the sense, maybe because of the action you've taken in order to deal with the threat he received. in the u.k., we did a number of things and we significantly enhanced, for example, our capability among police in the u.k. >> your country has been targeted and attacked by members both homegrown as valid import from a number of muslim countries that you mentioned in pakistan and others.

what steps have a large population of do we? what steps have you taken, has her government taken to monitor these populations and to try to detect these kinds of plots without interfering with people's civil liberties? >> a lot of that is about people understanding communities involved in communities. we have a particular area of work that we do. it isn't about the detection of threat. it is about trying to prevent people from being involved in prevent them from being radicalized. these depend on good community engagement, from the police and with local community groups and organizations working with them to understand what is happening in the community. now, always in these areas

there's more to be done in these issues. one of the challenges for us as a mention in a speech, what is important is the best people to get the message to those who are at risk of adopting the ideology that leads country and the combat extremism, is the message from their own community to negate that ideology. one of the things i think we will certainly be doing is working not to my department, that her department of government, working on a new program of community participation and community engagement as part of this process of working with those. the vast majority people in all muslim communities who want to get on with their lives and just carry on like everybody else and don't listen to the ideology, but working with them to ensure the positive messages have been part of the community can be spread throughout.

>> what steps have you taken to counter the influence of individual extremists for moms or other leaders in the community who seek to radicalized these populations? it wasn't that long ago when the johnsbury street mosque and we saw the mom down the street, trying to indoctrinate people with their extremist ideology. what steps have you taken to try to intercept that? >> i mean, there's a number of things that can be done of course. people are actually preaching a message that is sent away against our law and criminal justice action against people. but also, it's about working with mosques, about the message it's been given and moms, but there's a lot of areas where we recognized the need to do more

work. in our prevent strand of her counterterrorism strategy, which is about preventing radicalization, we have identified a number of key areas, where we do need to do more. universities, higher education. we think there is scope of much more to be done in both identifying individuals who might be vulnerable to radicalization, but also in working in terms of the sort of people who go and speak at universities. it's freedom of speech and academic freedom. >> or do you draw the line? what's acceptable and what's not? >> well, first of august and obvious line that can be charged in relation to anything that would be suitable as being prosecuted under the law. that sort of obvious. how someone can work with and make them work at their national union of students about what

they are able to see working and speaking in universities here but there's more to be done in that area. and our prison is another area, where we need to do more to look at what messages can be given between prisoners, but also by others going into prison. >> well, i think one of the interesting phenomenon here it started that william avedisian and there's clearly been some movement among british muslims, but everywhere you try to counter extremism. how important do you think that is? >> i think it's feeling important. i think it is vital that messages about encountering extremism, countering ideology come from within the community and not just from government. >> have you seen any impact do not? >> i think it is having an

impact, but there is much we can do. it isn't just about countering ideology. it's about what you mentioned earlier, community engagement as an important part of this, too. >> can you give us a brief summary of what steps you are seeking to meet the challenge is that the upcoming olympics in london? and what kind of things to see if the primary challenges and threats? >> certainly, we've been working on the security of the olympics were some considerable time. we have a security plan in place, but that is constantly being worked on to make sure we are monitoring any potential issues that develop so we can respond to those. and it's obviously a mixed response. there will be a significant police presence at the olympics. but please are talking about dierker 12,000, which are police on the streets at certain times, which is double the number

currently they are on what is the biggest event that currently takes precedence around the olympics and paralympics with the organizing committee in relation to any security. so the security plan, which goes beyond the media venue at the olympics, but also some areas where other allied defense will be taking place. >> and, give us a sense if you love that u.k. is involved in a major security program at the moment. that cuts back across the board in many areas this cut tax implicated other areas of the police? >> now, there is a need for overall peace budget. in relation to counterterrorism, we've been protecting the counterterrorism budget. we protected the limbic security budget as well, specifically

protected that. as far as general policing is concerned, it is possible to make significant cuts in budget in the u.k. without affecting front-line policing operations. >> how do you do that? >> well, if you want the figures, i can give you those. you cut bureaucracy. if you brought all forces, the least efficient force is currently up to the level of sufficient the comment then you save 1.15 billion pounds. we've got to save over four years just over 2 billion. then you can add onto that by the way they do with i.t., procurement collaboration, bringing all forces that to the most efficient and both of those he saved 350 million each. you can save the pay freeze and

a two-year pay freeze across our public her. but we are doing policing a phone that adds up to you need to save. tonight we might need you to pop around to her super committee and give a few tips if you're saving 1.5 trillion. well, we'll open it up now to everyone here. we ask you to wait for the microphone, state their name and affiliation if you have one and once again, we are on the record, which means your statements on the record as well as questions. >> paul bremmer, world team sports. adam secretary, one of those issues are dealt with since 2011 is the problem with getting intelligence on terrorist threats collected at the national level down to the state and municipal officials who need it. our problem is somewhat more

complicated than yours because of the federal structure. i'm wondering if there's questions. >> well, i can talk about how we deal with that. the u.k., both have been different governmental structure and also been significantly different does make it easier. one of the things that was recognized by the last government was for me to set up regional counterterrorism unit and police agencies and we have done that. it's a reasonable structure we been able to ensure the intelligence is much more than men down to the local level. but obviously you've got to get a two-way street. it's not just a picture gathered at a national level going down to the levels that can be acted on. it is also the vital information that comes from local communities and local levels being properly fed back into the

national picture, where it can be connected with other information. [inaudible] >> when you see the municipal level, do you mean those bodies that are not law enforcement bodies? [inaudible] >> information will be shared as if necessary within this regional unit, yes and further down if necessary. >> good afternoon. i'm at al jazeera english. i like to congratulate you on the royal wending. i was passing the london night that the security forces were formed commendably. having returned to qatar in washington come to the rest and treatment of shape i thought, i was a bit disappointed because it seems that britain has seemed to take a more hard-line stance and even the israeli government. can you explain why this prominent palestinian husband home until now and never been

committed to defending anti-semitism back in israel. they obviously felt he was safe enough to find, continues to radicalize in their own population? thank you. >> in relation to that, i'm going to make the point, but i don't comment in detail on an individual case. given the legal proceedings taken place in relation to that in the moment, it would be a part inappropriate to comment in detail. i have the power's been a secretary to disco people from the u.k. which would not be conducive to be in the u.k. and the decision was taken in relation to that particular individual. as you know, he was unable to actually enter the u.k. and of course action is being taken to remove him from the u.k. and that is currently being challenged as illegal process. i think it is right that we have that power. i think it's also right we've

taken a slightly different stance over the last 18 months in latina this issue that aside, what people say and how they are able to encourage others to codewords they say is an important issue for us to address and that is why we have perhaps taken positions in relation to an visuals that might not have been taken in the past. that is why we have chosen to look not just at extreme, but extremism. it's important we do this because if we are able to do that, that enables us to operate at a different level than simply gone down the road of violent extremism. i'm sorry .2 in your specific question, but given the legal proceedings, it would not be ready for me to do so.

>> ratepayer. >> secretary may come in thank you for being here. and karen gottfried and i want to pick up on one of the comments you made when he talked about meeting the challenge is border and aviation security. you're talking about the european level passenger data collection, which made me think about the very different than the u.s. and europe on data privacy. i wondered if i could draw you out on the road you see your community plane on cyberterrorism and what lessons the way trial from the specs case. thank you for image. >> gosh, that is quite a challenge to answer in a short fashion. you're absolutely right. i mean, there are some different views about privacy of data in data sharing across the united states and european union and this is one of the discussions we are having within the european union at the moment and with the commission about what is appropriate in data sharing

in all of those issues. what i think is interesting in relation and obviously you've mentioned the swift atf tp decision we've taken. the european parliament to take a blocking position initially, but then it is possible to work with the commission and the parliament's two, with a solution that actually meant everybody's needs. it can be a lengthy process, but i think by carefully working with other states and the commission and parliament, it's possible to achieve what we need. one of the things that is changing with in europe is that more member states within the european union, more countries within europe now understand perhaps the issue of terrorism and away the fun some didn't in the past. the u.k. has a history with java terrorist attacks and therefore

have been well aware of the issue in dealing with it. one or two other significant countries like ways. if you look at what has happened in recent years, over the last year, for example, what has happened with extreme right wing in onslow assignment should, there is a greater awareness that this is an issue people need to address the need to be thinking about. it is in that context that we see no more willingness to move forward on this. i wouldn't say that everybody is suddenly leaping up to share data because they are still significant issues that we have to overcome. >> over here, yeah. >> thank you. mary from northrop i'm in. the u.k. is not the only country which is tightening its belt. i wonder if you might reflect to get your reaction to belt-tightening all over europe,

particularly in the southern half of europe, where borders are long and porous and there are issues that not only people trafficking, but infiltration of terrorists or people trafficking and whether you have heightened concerns about this because the belt-tightening in other countries and whether this might leave the european union to greater cooperation because everybody is coming back. >> yes, there are some very particular issues. i mean, there's one country with a particular issue about the border issue in the u.k. -- into europe in terms of the epiphany to do with problems at the border. but within the european union, what we are increasingly an eye for the u.k. and karzai colleagues to do is look at the part of cooperation that we can give each other and dealing

through the relatively new organization within the european union, which is there to give support and be able to move in the country has particular problems in maintaining border security, and being able to move them to give his support and can we give practical support in the u.k. portrait in sepia going to be part of groups who look only to countries and deal with these problems. i think that's the way to go for. it is i think one of the discussions we have with europe is the question is do we pass legislation or do we get down to it more practically from the u.k.? legislation is that going to do it. you've got to have a practical cooperation on the ground and that is something we've been looking on. of course we have been working with the number of member states in relation to what has happened as a result of arab spring and

the movements we've seen as a result also also from our point of view, we very much see the border security should be part of the stabilization packages and countries like libya. >> roger cressey. not on the home secretary, you talked about the affiliates and influence they have from their perspective. can you talk about pakistan-based groups who have not been considered a threat from project to a power or potential threat to western europe in the united states? ashtray tight about, i'd sue mohammed, how do you three that specific evidence in the british population there is recruitment and training going on for the scenario of seeking to project the threat to the west? thank you. >> well, as are referred to in my speech, i think these are areas we need to have a growing

awareness of and look at more closely. i mean, there have been some links into the u.k., particularly for an et, more in terms of fundraising and that activity in the past. we must be ever vigilant about what might develop in relation to god as we see the group or hop expanding its interest. and so, it is important for us, as there was pain, to be willing to think through not just al qaeda and al qaeda's affiliates, but be aware of the changes taking place elsewhere in working within communities and relations to those in the group. sometimes you see people who do it dvds that are perfectly reasonable and don't realize what the money is going to in its usage might be working with communities in explaining these things is another part of the

picture that to be involved in. >> you don't see any evidence that lat is doing any activities in ukp on fundraising at this point, recruiting for operations or anything of that interest? >> what we have seen in the u.k. has tended to be more in relation to fundraising. >> in the back. >> hello, i was actually interested in hearing more about whether there have been any changes to monitoring and combating extremism following the norway tragedy and also any concerns about the english defense league. >> yes, in reference to the english defense league, there is an organization who has been, as you know, the main activity of the leak is marches, demonstrations and a number of

occasions where they've taken place. there's a number of occasions where we stand the marches. i have recently agreed to a ban for edi march in east london very soon after the riots have taken place in london. and so comely to take positions from time to time to be in edl. but we have looked -- we were looking anyways, point of load following the oslo, what happened in onslow perhaps more extreme right groups and looking out one intention and capability they might have. we will be putting more resources into that. our new content strategy, the counterterrorism strategy is contest and when we revised our content strategy earlier this summer, we actually expanded it to say we are not just looking at international terrorism in

terms of al qaeda. we are also looking at all sorts of terrorism. the bulk of the thread if you like this to the al qaeda related threat, but we are looking more widely. >> mauri sonnenberg, jpmorgan. i would like you to educate me. and what i am thinking about is their own laws. for example, you mentioned trying to stop propagandizing by the terrorists. if you do have a glorification who were on a wondered whether or not they have glorification of terrorism, whether you've had prosecution of that, it is my understanding that high authorities can get more searches without judges in your

extradition laws, some of us think could be much better in terms of the movement of these people and i won't hold up anyone here with anymore. but what you get into that a little deeper, please? >> yes, i'll try to do a short summary of some of the issues around our laws. we are lucky and a publishing a green paper on some aspects of the legal system in relation to issues like protection of close material and that paper will be published sometimes in the next couple of months or so. so we are looking that that whole issue. on the question of the propaganda in relation, there have been people prosecuted for holding terrorist relationships and materials, cities are laws that are being used. in relation to some of the other aspects, i'm sorry because you mentioned two others.

[inaudible] >> higher authority. [inaudible] >> yes, there's a whole variety of types. the requirement that is needed to enable those warrants to be undertaken various depending on what the warrants are. for example, under the regulation of investigatory practices ask, with her, those questions are responsible for the secretary of state. so with that level decisions are taken in relation to those. we have made changes lately, but not in relation to counterterrorism. the fact counterterrorism laws are used by local government inappropriately and we now require them to ask her to a the go-ahead to use some of those

powers. >> the other is extradition. >> yes, thank you. we have a few of our extradition being undertaken at the moment and i hope within the next couple of months that will be published. if you looked at u.k. relationship, but at the relationship of the u.k. with other countries. it's looking at the european arrest warrant question. we have a group of lawyers, justice scott baker is pleading not panel. the panel came to the united states to a three month ago, met with the department of justice year, has talked to people here and in other parts of the world about your extradition. so we are waiting to see what that review comes up with in terms of extradition. >> there's more than 40 cases or so the u.s. has requested and they're still not resolved. >> yes, i'm aware of that and there's a number of high-profile cases with the decision

ultimately is to what happens down to the home secretary and i am aware of that. but if i could, the issue we need to deal with is less about extradition, but it is about the impact of human rights on ability to deport or remove people from the u.k. if that was a country what they would not be treated properly, they would be subject to an appropriate treatment when they return back home and that is an issue. where will work in a latina number of countries. we have agreements with a number of countries that we have to do for people with assurances they will be treated properly when they return and working with more countries where we can develop some assurances, some of those agreements so we can give ourselves greater ability that we think is that we let in and involved in terrorist relation

at d. but were not able to prosecute. >> in the back. >> emphasize the northrop grumman. i like to go back to the secure border scene. could you ask and find your police border command. you may bear market to be similar to or cbp. we have a very large fleet of airplanes and uavs and quite a bit of men and equipment. would you expound on that, please? >> what we are doing for setting up the crime agency in policing the u.k. we are moving local force levels in the creating a separate national crime agency, which will be dealing with an international level crying.

it will have a number of homes within it, just to complete the picture come in child protection fiat will be an organized command based on soccer and we are going to create a new economic crime command because the u.k. has not been good enough in the past dealing with economic crime. and the fourth command will be the border policing command and it will bring together policing capabilities together with our u.k. border agency, the immigration authority at the borders, which you would be surprised with this matches you've got your, but it has some of the things you appropriately mention. one of the reasons for looking at cbp here is to look at the extent to which we can learn lessons here in terms of that

border police command, we set it up within the national crime agency capabilities empowers that it has. the national crime agency will require legislation to set it up so won't be in place until 2013. and although we will be appointing a person who will have it will be appointed within the next three month and whose work is obviously on making sure we put the necessary legislation empowers into place. so we're looking at the example in the united states to see what we can learn from that and whether there is a model they are, aspects of the model we should take it up order casein command. >> i think we have time for one more question and then we'll wrap it up. >> make living with fox news. i believe he was secretary this week. we often hear these meanings are protected. just wondering if we so much going on, can you get a sense of what you talked about this week?

what are you working on? what ideas were exchanged a big site that? >> well, not when it's a riveting exchange because there's one or two things that might want to talk about were publicly at a later date when the ideas have been developed. we talked quite a lot about counterterrorism. we talked about the issue of the question i just responded to about border security here in the u.s., about the latest cbp operates and so forth and how we can learn from that particular model. we have talked about -- i've been talking with others in the u.s. about the events we've had recently in terms of riot and gain and the use of social media of dollars to get information around in relation to those. quite a number of issues. >> very good. please join me in thanking the home secretary for a time. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> the first thing coming year the room, see the flash in every inning and the next thing you hear is them cry out in pain. the second thing i heard is, he notes, as i've lost anything special, shoot me.

>> national security adviser, thomas donilon participated in a q&a discussion at the economic club of washington d.c. today. he discussed al qaeda, aired spring in military operations in iraq and afghanistan. this is 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> can i have her attention so we can start? thank you very much. but we are very honored today to have as our special guest and national security adviser, tom donilon. thomas had a distinguished career in national security affairs and government were generally over some 30 years.

i first met tom when i was working in the white house under president carter. tom had just graduated from catholic university came to work in the white house and congressional affairs operation very quickly his talents became so apparent that he became in charge of the present delicate at the age of 23. and did a spectacular job, which president carter get the renomination. that election didn't go the way we thought it would go. tom then went to a president carter set up his post government career and then went to law school at the university of virginia, where he became a member of our review. he then joined subsequently a million light-years of back-and-forth in government service for many years. he served in the clinton administration as chief of staff to warren christopher and also assistant secretary of state and was integrally involved in that foreign policy operation as well. and then, in the obama administration, he served

initially deputy national security adviser in about a year ago or so became a national security adviser as well. so he served in one of the few people to have been in that carter, clinton and obama administration viewed as a national security adviser, he the briefing and a salad over 500 briefing for the president. he person every morning. he's also the chair of the principals committee, which consists of the senior officers involved in the formulation of foreign policy and in that the committee meetings that led to the successful raid on osama bin laden and spent one day -- 11 and half hours sharing that committee. he's been integrally involved as well as the effort in china and middle east and in his spare time, it's time for two children and his wife is also a member of the administration. she is the chief of staff for jill biden and his brothers account or to face present by.

so they know a lot about this administration. >> wheelies get to see each other once in a while. >> i have no doubt. >> so you have worked for three very high i.q. president. who is the smartest of them? [laughter] >> that wasn't in the staff preparation for the national security interview. i guess the answer to the question would be this, that one of the keys to being able to work closely in a senior advisory role with three presidents over 30 years of not answering questions like that. [laughter] >> that is a fair answer. but i do think i have the privilege to work. ministrations and fairly closely with them, with president carter, clinton and obama. and i am struck, david increasingly but the burden placed on the president. you mention the bin laden operation. that is a good example.

at the end of the day, you mentioned we have a long principals meeting that day. at the end of the day come when the decision was made on the thursday before, the president had divided council. he sat at the head of the table in the situation room. r. team of national security advisers of vice president biden to secretary clinton to then secretary gates secretary pana and others. as i said, when he wants other than to make a decision, it's on his shoulders. the theme increasingly struck by that the longer he served a name also struck by the fact that we have been exceedingly lucky with the men who've been in that job. >> this mention of bin laden matters. but me get you that if i can now. that night, the night before the president spoke at the white house correspondents dinner,

teen new he did a very good job of hiding the fact he about those pressures on his mind. did you have any doubt that the rate would succeed? >> well come a couple of points on them. we had high confidence that the operation could be executed by special forces that america. stepping back in terms of this, a couple things. number one, the evidence with respect to osama bin laden being at about about pakistan was circumstantial. this analysis that was the result that it took between the course of two administrations over to president. many of the same people were working with us in the obama administration, analyzing the seven. if he can focus during august of 2010 and we worked very hard. but at the end of the day, it

was a circumstantial case. but it was the best evidence we had with respect to whereabouts of osama bin laden and his giving out of tora bora for many years ago. so is the best case we have, but a circumstantial case. so basically, there is a slightly better than even chance perhaps to be fair. when people try to put percentage points unintelligence estimates, this is something bankers do our intelligence analysts do. you know, it really is a judgment call at that point. the president has tremendous confidence and goes directly to your question, with the ability to execute permission and that's one of the reasons he chose that option of a helicopter posted the other other options he had. special forces have developed expertise to thousands of these kinds of operations and through the experience of the first two and half years of his presidency, to the experience he

knew about at our special had been afghanistan, through the briefing and rehearsals, what he did have is 100% competency in the ability of special forces to take our abbottabad and get that. so an unclear judgment call and intelligence, but a very high degree of confidence with respect to the ability to special forces to do the operation. >> when you heard that a helicopter had failed, did you relive the carter administration base? were you worried this would be another failed mission? footage of complete competency could still succeed? >> i spend quite a lot of time worrying about things, as you would hope. >> with respect to that specific incident, david, independent contingency that the special

forces have thought about and plan for. and the fact is even one there was none that you mention with respect to the helicopter which came down in the courtyard, i don't think that these folks just a minute, frankly. i'm up and get delayed more a minute in the tremendous adaptability to what is an extraordinary set of skills and an asset that the united states has right now. >> the iconic photo for you all looking at the screen, what were you looking? >> i don't have the answer to that question. as he said, i was there for the entire day. there were hundreds of pictures taken, but we are monitoring. >> was a plan to not bring back osama bin laden alive? was not always the plan?

for which you have brought them back alive if he said i surrender? >> now, while first of all, it was the military option against an enemy combatant community deleter come the only leader that al qaeda had ever had. we're at war with al qaeda authorized by the congress in 2001 through the use of military force. bin laden in that case did not surrender. he didn't have any indication he was going to surrender. one of the hallmarks of al qaeda operations and other kinds of booby-trapping of homes and facilities where they were. so i think that our forces were absolutely within their right to take the action that they did and indeed because the president chose the office he chose, the helicopter raid in, we were able to limit your extraordinary efforts of special forces, collateral damage, protection of men and women and anyone who

wasn't associated with was protected. the action to race against those combatants who didn't indicate anything know they have any intention of surrendering. >> shift into another person who we are not friendly with, gadhafi. if gadhafi is found, is the u.s. position that he should be tried in libya or be tried by the international court? what would the united states prefer? >> again, bolivian people will have to make a decision. i guess it is a couple things about that. i do think it is important that he is captured and brought to justice. i think he has shown over the course of his life that he is capable of exercising and undertaking actions with negative comp classes, including killing americans. i think he would continue to be, not a threat in terms of overturning the government, but

the people of clearly thrown him out, but in terms of undertaking harassment and try to undermine democratic government will come in libya. it is an important thing to capture them. although, this is not falling down development of libyan government. it is up to the libyan people. i think the leadership of the transition said they would capture him and turn him over to the criminal court to be tried there. >> yesterday, president sarkozy and prime minister cameron were in libya saying they wanted to help the new government. is the united states prepared to help the government and what resources are we prepared to give to the new government? >> the united states is prepared and we have helped the national council in its efforts to get the outcome today. we have been leading the effort, the affair prior to recognize

them. we have frozen under our laws here, as you know, some 30 billion plus dollars and libyan assets. we did that immediately after the presidents of the gadhafi should step down the united states took a extraordinary set of actions over the weekend to free against 3 million libyan assets. we've gone to the u.n. and spent about a billion half dollars today. that's an extraordinary resource and will be working on getting to the libyans government. we will support the reopening an establishment of the oil industry there. obviously will be working with him through the united nations principally in terms of getting their government skills. >> a lot of challenges, but it is a very big success for nato. the operation here, you know,

the president a potential real humanitarian catastrophe when gadhafi was threatening a town on the coast of libya in benghazi which is 700,000 people. the president some opportunity to act in concert with others to protect those people. we did that and i think it was a well designed a roach, where we decided that military action could be taken, could be successful. we set of criteria that concluded we wouldn't go unilaterally or had united states boots on the ground. ..

mine not do the same and syria if there are been people killed there why don't we do something? >> i really doubt the front end there are criteria you need to work with with respect to military and among the reactions, including a set of allies to work with but it also needs to be effective don't expect anything soon. >> i don't expect that, no. what i expect to do in the case of syria is we have organized an effort around the world to isolate and squeezed the regime.

he took a trays and other trees in front of him and what she had done of course now is lost even neighbors who had close relations an example with turkey invested ten years trying to develop a positive perspective relationship with syria and during the course of the last whatever 45 for 60 days to demonstrate his commitment with oppression and slaughtered people during the holy month of ramadan and he rejected turkey and its efforts to push towards reform. he now has the european union last week putting in place oil and energy sanctions that's what 90% of the experts go to and he succeeded in making a pariah. so at the end of the day -- >> you think he survives? >> i think the end of the day the regime we can't put a time frame on that because of the end of the day the regime will not be the governing regime.

>> speaking of the trials the former ally of the united states of egypt is now being put on trial in egypt. as the united states government support those trials? >> that is a decision for the people of egypt to undertake an accord with their laws. >> do you have any regrets the way that they were handled by the administration? sometimes people thought we were pushing them to lead and sometimes people said we could tolerate them for a while. are you happy with the message that came out from the administration and that period? >> it was consistent with the principles we laid out on the arab world since the beginning of the year which are these, we are opposed oppression and violence and we are for a set of universal principles, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and third, we stand for reform from economic and political reform. i don't have all regret the way

that the united states handled -- i do regret that president mubarak did not take action sooner to be responsive to what was going on in the square around egypt. i think there were mistakes there that turned out to be tragic for him. >> one last thing on the question of the arabs bring, obviously its ongoing, it's very country to country as we have been discussing. it is driven from the broader trends at work letting people down, communications now possible in countries which a lot of these movements due to move forward. a couple of big strategic impact stow, the contrast with al qaeda

is really stuck here and this is a very big blow to the al qaeda narrative. the people in the square and indonesia and syria and throughout the arab world were not in any way advocating violent no positive agenda of al qaeda. it's a blow to the al qaeda narrative so it's also been a blow to iran i think. iran felt they were going to take advantage of this and if you do the analysis right now of the arabs bring in iran, iran turns out to have been a blow to israel because egypt now, the israelis close their embassies in cairo in fact are you weary that the impact of israel from the uprising in egypt will be damaging and is it necessary? >> i think two or three things on that. number one is the united states is absolutely committed to the security of israel, and i spend a lot of time personally on that

issue. we have been devoted to ensure. we've worked with them on important projects. very important in this circumstance like the iron dome which is a protection against rocket attacks. we have a very deep intelligence and security cooperation so as a first principal of the middle east policy the security is front and center number one. number two, there is tremendous uncertainty on the borders right now, and that is obviously the focus of the people working through these issues and dealing with this uncertainty and we have to acknowledge that and as we work with israel and its security will acknowledge that uncertainty to read the egypt israel relationship has been a pillar of the security since you and i were in the white house 30 years ago, over 30 years ago, and we have been working on both

sides to do everything we can to preserve that. we had an incident last friday in cairo, the israeli embassy is on an upper floor of a high-rise building in cairo. there was a general breakdown in cairo last friday and the ministry of the interior and others responsible were not enforcing it and it migrated to the building where the embassy is and they started to push over and threatening the embassy. we worked very hard during that day and that night with the egyptians to have them meet their obligation which is an obligation of a sovereign country to protect the embassy of another country in your country. islamic it is respected now? >> that night we were able to evacuate the israelis who were under siege and we were able to do that working with the egyptian military leadership who run the country right now.

we've been very clear with the egyptians on their obligations now and they met those obligations. it was a tough seem but we've also been very direct with the egyptians with respect to the importance of maintaining its international agreement including its agreement with israel, which are the pillars to get our security there. there are other issues at work right now given this uncertainty there are simultaneous revolution's going on right now. so there's a very serious security situation for example that has really become difficult to handle in the wake of the events in egypt over the last six or seven months that we've been focused on and we've asked the egyptians to focus on dealing with this and this resulted in the death of several is released several weeks ago. >> no, you have a relationship with king abdullah of saudi arabia. i was told when i read in the newspapers that he was very

upset at the way that we handle egypt. is that true and is our relationship different than it was before the uprising in egypt? >> let me address that directly. number one, obviously the outset of this year there was tremendous uncertainty in the region including it began in tunisia moving towards the elections the third week in october very important story indonesia it began and moved to egypt. president mubarak was a leader of long standing in the region had close relationships in the region. it was not the united states or any external force that led to president mubarak having to step in as the president of egypt, it was an indigenous said that defense. during that period, i would be less than honest if i didn't indicate that there were disagreements about how the united states should go about handling that. recent agreements within the administration and other countries in the region and i think it's fair to say and i

said this publicly before that our conversations about this or scratchy and there were disagreements about this. third, i think since then it has become clear to everybody in the region that these were indigenous forces, that the forces were building for a long time, this mistake had been made by the leaders. i talked directly with the leadership and i think the relationship is in very good shape. why? i think because it is based in the shared strategic interest and you get past things like happened at the beginning of this year. there's a recognition that this would be the forces and the mistakes were made in the government's and elsewhere that they were not brought on by the united states or an external force and to reflect on the fact and these are the conversations like i would have that we've had a relationship for 70 years that is based on a set of shared

strategic interest that include the following, not having an asian or some other group did a dominant role in the region. we have a shared interest in the counterterrorism efforts, we have a shared interest in global growth and economic growth and a shared interest in a secure and stable energy supplies among others. so david, i guess to be perfectly square with you that yes, there were some issues of the beginning of the year. the had been worked through. king abdullah and president obama have a very good relationship, and we really have i think through this kind of focus on and remind ourselves of the strategic foundations and the share interest and as you know it's those shared interest and ties that the end of the day are critical. countries don't engage with each other if it isn't in their interest. >> between now and after the presidential election to using the prospect of a peace agreement in the middle east

between israel and palestine? >> that's been exceedingly difficult of a problem. we have pushed through during the course of this administration quite a bit of change coming and we have focused on as a principal strategic priority renewing and restoring united states prestige power and authority which will trade ammunition. this is and the policy and there's a lot of reasons for it, we were tremendously invested in iraq and there was a tremendous amount of capital spending as well as treasurer but political and capital are of the world we had the global financial crisis in 2000 to 2008 and there is a dynamic in the relations obviously the moves against the dominant power and we were dealing with all of those simultaneously and president obama came into office and we have had principal efforts to restore that authority power and influence in the world so that

we could move towards addressing our national interest and that included -- i will get to your answer to the question in just a second. >> i assume you're not going to have a peace agreement between now and the end of the year. >> i think that is probably right. as we pushed-, you know, we obviously have a strong focus on restoring our revitalizing alliances which by the way is something i would like to talk about at some point focused on enhancing the relations and deepening partnerships with the emerging powers and rebalancing our foreign policy is where i wanted to get to. the drag on iraq and the renewed focus on asia, the tightening of the focus and intensify think the counterterrorism efforts and focusing on really the key

challenges like non-proliferation, and we have a lot of that done i think and on the right path. we have not been able to and move the middle east peace process i think in as far as we would like to and it's a difficult set of issues and choices. the president laid out in may has done consistently his approach was which is a two-stage solution. we will continue to be persistent and i can't make any predictions. >> you mentioned iraq. how many american soldiers you think we will have an iraq by the time of our next presidential election? will we be ghana or keep 15,000 there and will we depend on what the iraqi side asked us to do or are we going to decide what we want to do? >> at the end of the day iraq is a sovereign country. under the understanding by the two administrations, but the bush administration and the obama administration by december 21st, 2011 the united states will complete the drawdown of the troops we have now and we are on track to do

that. we had 140 to 150,000 troops when president obamacare jul office and we now have about 45,000. the troops are on track to withdraw from iraq and that will be complete by the end of this year. >> on the issue that you raise like we do with countries all over the world we will have a conversation with iraq about the nature of the security relationship we are going to have going forward and in terms of the training and assisting and things like that and those discussions are ongoing. the bottom line is twofold. one is the united states is on track and will complete the withdrawal by december 31st, 2011 with respect to the relationship going forward that is a separate conversation that will take place. >> how many troops will we have in afghanistan by the time of the next election? >> the president -- we came into office with fewer than we have

now. >> the afghan effort was drifting strategically and under resources. i don't think there's a lot of disagreement on that. that i feel was the first presentation that i got during the transition. we looked at it very hard. we narrowed our goal down to two that is ultimately strategically defeating al qaeda and putting in place a security force in afghanistan and support mechanism that wouldn't have us fall completely to the taliban providing operational space like the group for al qaeda to plan operations against the united states. we searched. the president announced in june as he promised three would begin the drawdown. by the end of this year -- welcome by the end of next summer which would be september september 2,012th, we will have fully recovered the trip. the first are 33,000 troops.

10,000 of those will come out this year and an additional 23,000 will come out next year and we can held by the third week in september 2012. at that point it will be between 65 to 68,000 american troops in afghanistan. we then will set the pace from than the president's speech on this is for a clear we will continue the pace of withdrawal and afghanistan and in towards 2014 when we will complete turnover the security leak to the afghans and the united states remaining of course there will be basically in the present force focusing on the counterterrorism. islamic use it in the meetings with three people who ran against each other for president, barack obama, joe biden and hillary clinton. what are those meetings like? what's the relationship among those people? >> well again, i have to be careful of my characterization of these things.

but the bottom line is one and as you know, there is the sense of people who commit the public service the fact is you're a prisoner for 300 million americans every day to make these decisions, so the president obviously is the leader of the group. now these are not shy people like the rest of our group, but it's a group of very experienced people, people that express their opinions very forcefully, but i want to say a couple things about him. you mentioned the bin laden read earlier, and as i mentioned, we had our first real focus on the attack to words pakistan in august 2010. we had some 24 interagency meetings on this topic leading

up to the rate at the beginning of may of 2011. we had half a dozen principles committing in the four or five weeks before and there wasn't the week and i think that speaks well obviously of the commitment and seriousness of the group the president put together so the robust debate, these are deeply experienced public figures who bring a lot of experience to the table, but a sense of trust and at the end of the day the president makes the decisions. last thing i will say about this, we put in place a system and a process which i think has been essentials to our success on the foreign policy national security side and it had these elements to it. one process, the national security council process not competing process these, there

were not back doors into the president, there were no national security prices eased, one process endeavor but a sign that the beginning been the exclusive process by which the decisions would be made. number two, the decisions made would be executed by this group. number three, when you can to the table you can with a view in the view of your building. number four, that i would come at on our side that the decisions and the oversee a lot of businesses and very important that the results of the meetings would be published in writing in 24 hours so the people could see what their assignments were and objectives they disagree with absolute clarity at the end of the day. we also fully integrated the vice president's national security team. the same people who briefed president on iraq if the vice president and a fully integrated steel. so the system is robust and is

adding contrast on the other administration you are referring to. >> i just described the administration we build. but i think it's important to respect the system we build is based on our study of the scowcroft ann gates model and the bush administration, bush 41. if you were to pick one person to be the role model for the ideal national security adviser who would you say is your role model? >> that is a question for the following reason because each national security adviser serves in the functioning in a manner that the president wants him or her to serve so there are different approaches, number two, i wanted to say something about the national security advisers and the national security generally. they're really is kind of a community of people in the national security to have been

in these jobs who understand them and work with each other across party lines. i get tremendous support from my american predecessors. from steve tabler and condoleezza rice and colin powell and brent scowcroft i'm in touch with them quite regularly and get good advice. i wish frankly we had the same time since of community and by partisanship on the political side because there is this sense of, you know, i've been there, i know what you're dealing with, i disagree with you on some policy issues, no doubt, but at the end of the day we are all about protecting the country and advancing the national interest and i see these folks quite regularly so there is a community of interest in the national security side which i think is important for the country. you asked about models, they're have been different models. i think in terms of the process management i think that in a study carefully over the years i do think that one person has had

the shot twice and did put in place kind of this committee system in the late 80's that we follow today and that is brent scowcroft. on the policy development side, you know, the person who again i had to deal with pretty consistently obviously dr. kissinger is masters of policy development and i learned a lot from talking to him, but it really is unusable until you get there it is an unusual community of interest where the politics to get pushed aside. lots of disagreements about policy, but lots of mutual support frankly, and i am very, very grateful to my predecessor on both sides of the aisle from this support. >> can you preach the former presidents of the united states on a national security matters you call them up and do they have good ideas about what you should be doing? >> i'm in regular touch with my

predecessors. there may be specific issues a president has to be briefed on and i have done that and there are sometimes projects we ask former presidents to undertake and i will spend time with them as a couple of examples. we work very closely with president clinton on his trip to north korea you will recall to get back to the young journalists who had been kidnapped basically taken into custody in north korea and we worked closely together with him on designing that trip working with various aspects ensuring that it wasn't and that was for real so we worked obviously with president bush xliii on the be a relief effort, the short answer is it's kind of a project.

you've had two careers in the government service you've been involved in the national security for quite some time and he's also been involved in the presidential campaigns, you briefed presidents fer candidates and you felt on the debate preparations since 84 and helped president obama with his debate preparations. when you were in the oval office of the president and nobody else is around do they see what is your political the advice. this point before i got deeply involved in the foreign policy if you look at my political record you wouldn't spend a lot of time asking about my political advice. but no, i got to spend quite a bit of time during the debate preparation and 50 or 60 hours getting ready for the campaign.

the last two became president said they were pretty [laughter] pretty good at this and kind of a tremendous communicators with president clinton and president obama. but on the question you ask directly i don't have political conversations with the president come and. >> given your political experience you don't think -- >> to be totally honest with you, i think that of a work we have to do to get their fills up more than the time we have together. >> can you explain to people what it is to be in a briefing with the president every morning you go in and tell things presumably are not in the newspapers and nobody else knows, losses in those meetings? the vice president, what time does it occur and how long does it last? >> it occurs at 9:00 19:30 in the morning and it's a combination of intelligence and

a the president, vice president and the people we are briefing. at the beginning of the briefing we will have intelligence led by general copper or briefs on a particular issue, general clappers of the director of the intelligence. he may ask to bring another head of an intelligence service like dave petraeus or another one of the services and the constellation of 16 or 17 intelligence organizations. that takes place and then we have a sort of policy briefing i would lead and an analysis of its implications and then the three or four or five or six most important things going on in the world that day there may be three or four decisions we want to reset the date to reach during the course of that but it does not come up in the course of the 24 hours since the last briefing. but the principal people who do this again the head of the

intelligence service and then myself, dennis is the principal deputy national security officer, tony who is the national studio president john brennan and that is the core group that meets every morning. it's a very efficient way i think and lasts between 30 to 40 minutes every morning. it's an efficient way to have a kind of continuing conversation and focusing on the key issues in front of the president and the country. as black as the president purport to read things or how do you compare him with the other presidents? >> with respect to that, the president has read all the materials before and there's different ways to do it and again different presidents do it different ways, some prefer to have it presented and to have the book and to them like a key item and go through with a briefing. president obama has read everything the was prepared from the morning before we go in, and

you know, we work from there. if you start a briefing on things that are in the newspaper not going to be long career as a briefer >> we past agreements with area and columbia and others the sea treaty. d think you can get this through this year? >> number one with respect to the free trade agreement, and the ambassador here is from the republic of korea with whom we have been working closely on the important korea soft agreement. there are trees that are ready to go that have been negotiated but i expect to see passed this fall. korea, colombia and panama. they are very important. this will be the largest free

trade agreement by the united states since nafta. it's critical in creating american jobs and opportunity and in terms of us integrating ourselves into the fastest growing economic region and the world. there are as you notify looking in the region and number of preferential trade agreements and if we hadn't integrated, if we don't pursue these we are going to be excluded from opportunities so it's important from the export industry and for the creation of jobs. but it's critically important for the kind of effort i described in terms of rebalancing. that is when we came into office you get the opportunity to ask the following question as you would if you brought in new business. where we were in the stand under invested, where are we underweighted and overweighted, and it's never judgment at the start of the administration we were underweight as a nation given the importance to the future of the united states, and indeed cicatrix clinton took the

first trip as the secretary of state to asia at the beginning of the administration which was the first time this took place since dean rusk became secretary of state in the kennedy administration. so we have really been focusing on a bigger presence, focusing on building on architecture. i think we have been a very good job at revitalizing the alliance's which are the core effort part of that has to be

china but it's part of an overall strategic focus on maintaining great relationships and getting them right. if you have your great power relationships and a good place it's a platform for which it can work to attacked problems. if they are not in a decent place, it becomes problematic in terms of attacking problems so we have focused very tightly on improving our relations in europe and asia and from russia and we worked very hard with the russian federation on the relationship and part of that is obviously china.

so we have spent an enormous amount of time focusing on china and we have engaged in an intensive week president obama and president hu jintao had nine face-to-face meetings. we are deeply involved in the series of other dialogues. we've been working to continue to integrate china in the rules based system in the world. we have been pressing with china on other things important to our company and other companies around the world and we have been working to shape the environment in asia said that the rise occurs in a more peaceful way. i think the relationship with china has been fairly productive and constructive and is in a good place but there are always a lot of challenges in the relationship that's complicated. >> time for one more question and that is what is it that keeps you up at night with is the single greatest worry you have as the national security advisor to the problems you have to face is the one thing that you are worried about the keeps you up at night or a least worries you?

>> we have challenges, and economic recovery is critical. the president said in a speech last year history doesn't really allow the country to maintain without mentioning its economic vitality. there's a direct relationship between the strength at home and strength abroad and revitalizing the economy is absolutely critical. i do everyday focus on the safety and security of the men and women we have a broad and in the war zone. i focus every day about our homeland security and terrorist threats. we've made tremendous progress lately and we have a situation with respect to al qaeda. we judge at the end of 2010 al qaeda was in the worst shape since it had been in 2001 and we took a big blow against them in

may with a summit in london we have to get a number of steps against them but it still is a threat. but in general you worry every day but the dispersion of the means of the violence and technology and that's why the agenda is so important. but we have to build a second term for president obama whether you see as national security adviser. >> i would say two things about that. i would argue with fi if. it's a privilege to surf. i enjoy every day. if you're in my position and looked on the table every day and you see vice president joe biden, secretary leon panetta, david petraeus, it is a privilege to go to work every day. >> you are very articulate and know these issues well i appreciate your doing this and

whenever you have the national security adviser for an hour or so you realize nothing terrible is happening in that world at least as i know. let me give you a gift here. [applause] this bill again at the district of columbia, the original map the district of columbia. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

president obama today signed into law a bill that speeds up the patent process by granting patents to people who file first. harmonizing the u.s. patent law in other countries. right now there's a lot of over 1 million pending patent applications. the president also called on congress to pass his $447 billion jobs bill. from thomas jefferson high school in alexandria va, this is 25 minutes. [applause]

thank you so much for the wonderful welcome. i want to thank rebecca for the wonderful introduction. give rebecca a big hand. [applause] in addition to rebecca, on stage we've got some very important people. first before we do i want to thank your wonderful principal. [applause] [cheering] stand up. [applause] the people who are responsible for making some great progress on reforming the patent law here today, senator patrick leahy of fremont. [applause]

and lamar smith, republican from texas. [applause] and in addition we have representative bob goodlatte, representative jim moran, representative maldon walz. [applause] becky is the acting secretary of commerce. [applause] david is there a director of u.s. patent and trademark office. [applause] and we've got some extraordinary business leaders here. the ceo. [applause] jessica mathews, ceo of on chartered place. [applause] the ceo of dupont, the ceo of

eli lilly. [applause] and we have another outstanding student. [applause] this is one of the best high schools in the country. [applause] as you can see it is filled with some pretty impressive students. when i was a freshman in high school none of my work was a patent for the. [laughter] we had an exhibit of some of the projects that you are doing and the first high school student satellite, a wheelchair

controlled by brain waves, robots, there's one thing -- i don't know exactly how to describe it, but it's measuring toxicity and the oceans and it's unbelievable stuff. succumb to the students here, i could not be more impressed by what you guys are doing i'm hoping that i will learn something just by being close to you. [laughter] that through osmosis -- [laughter] [applause] i will so gain some knowledge. i already feel smarter just standing here. [laughter] one the president would have loved this school is the person that is named after. thomas jefferson. he was a pretty good mentor himself, and he also happened to

be the first american to oversee our country's patent process and that's why we are here today. when thomas edison filed his patent for the photograph, his application was approved in just seven weeks, and these days that process is taking an average of three years. over the last decade the patent applications have nearly tripled, and because the patent office doesn't have the resources to deal with all of them, right now there are about 700,000 applications that haven't even been opened yet. these are jobs and businesses of the future just waiting to be treated. the ceos represented here today, all of them are running companies based on creativity and invention and the ability to commercialize good ideas. and somewhere in that stack of

applications could be the next technological breakthrough, the next miracle drug, the next idea that would launch the next fortune 500 company. and somewhere in this country, maybe in this room is the next thomas edison or steve jobs, just waiting for the chance to turn their idea into a new thriving business. so we can't afford to drag our feet any longer. not at that time we should be doing everything we can to create good middle class jobs to put americans back to work, and we've always succeeded because we have been the most dynamic and innovative economy in the world. that has to be encouraged, that has to be configured. we will do everything we can to encourage the entrepreneurial spirit wherever we find it and we should be helping american companies compete and sell their products all over the world. we should be making it easier

and faster to turn to new ideas and to new jobs and businesses and knock down many barriers that stand in the way because if we are going to create jobs now and in the future potential out build and out and educate and out innovate every other country on earth. we have a lot of competition out there. and if we make it hard for people with good ideas to attract investment and give them the market in countries like china will beat us at it. that's why asked congress to send me a bill that reforms the outdated process that cuts away the red tape, slows down inventors and entrepreneurs, and today i am happy that i had the opportunity to finally sign that bill. it's a bill that will put a dent in the huge stock of the patent applications waiting for review and will help start-ups and small-business owners turn their ideas into products three times faster than they can today. and will then approve patent quality and help give

entrepreneurs the protection and confidence they need to attract investment, to grow their businesses and hire more workers so i want to thank all the members of congress for helping to get this done. i especially want to thank patrick leahy and lamar smith who love the process in a bipartisan way in the house and in the senate. i have to take this opportunity while it got members of congress here to say i've got another bill that -- [laughter] i want them to get past to help the economy right away. it's called the american jobs act. [applause] >> and these things are connected. this change in our patent law is part of our agenda for making us competitive over the long term. but we have also got a short-term economic crisis, a

set of challenges we have to deal with right now. with the american jobs act does is put more people back to work and more money in the pockets of working americans. and everything in the proposal, everything in the american jobs act is the kind of proposal that's been supported by democrats and republicans in the past to read everything will be paid for, and you can read the plan for yourself during all the free time you guys have here at thomas jefferson. [laughter] on white house.gov to read by what congress to pass this jobs bill right away. let me give you an example of why this is relevant. we are surrounded today by an outstanding teachers. men and women who prepare our young people to compete in the global economy. if congress passes this bill then we can get thousands of teachers all across the country that have been laid off because of difficulties of the state and local levels with their budget we can get them back to work in

the classroom. the jobs bill would put unemployment construction workers back to work rebuilding schools and roads and bridges and it would give tax credits to the company's that higher hour veterans because if you server work country you shouldn't have to worry about finding a job when you get home to read it connects the long-term unemployed to keep their skills sharp while they are looking for a job and gives thousands of young people the hope of the job next summer and we will cut taxes for every small business owner in america. and if you're a small-business owner that hires more workers and raise salaries to get an extra tax credit to read it won't add to the deficit, it will pay for it by following the same rules every family follows come spend money on things you need, cut back on things you don't and we'll make sure everybody pays their fair share including those of us who have been incredibly fortunate and blessed in this country. so this bill the answers the

urgent need to create jobs right away. but as i've said, we can't stop there. we have to look further down the road and build an economy that lasts into the future and that's going to depend on the talent of the young people who like you. the economy that creates good middle class jobs that paid well and offers family a sense of security. we live in the world that is changing so rapidly companies like the once represented here today can set up shop anywhere there is an internet connection and if we want the start-ups' here and established companies like dupont or deily to continue to make products here we have to compete. the patent bill will win courage that innovation but there are other steps that we can take. to the for example my administration is announcing a new center that will help companies reduce the time and cost of developing life-saving

drugs. when scientists and researchers at the national institutes of health discover a new cure or brick through we're going to make it easier for the startup companies to sell the products to the people who need them. we've got more than 100 universities and companies to agree they will work together to bring more intense since to market as fast as possible and we are developing a strategy to create jobs in the biotechnology which has tremendous promise for health, clean energy and the environment. to help the country compete for new jobs and businesses, we also need to invest in the basic research and technology. so the great idea of the future will be born in the labs and classrooms like these. you have such an unbelievable head start already. but as you go to mit and caltech and wherever else you are going to go we were going to find is the further you get along in

your pursuit the more you will be relying on the research grant and the governments are always playing a critical role in financing the basic research that then leads to all sorts of inventions. so we have to make sure that we are continuing to invest in basic research so you can do the work that you are capable of and still pay the rent which is important as you will find out. [applause] left irca we need to continue to provide incentives and support to make sure the next generation of manufacturing takes root knot in china or europe but in the united states because it is not enough to invent things our workers should also be building the products stamped with of the three words made in america. [applause] and if we want companies to hire workers, we need to make sure we

get every american the schools and the education they need to compete. we have to have more schools like thomas jefferson, and it's got to start even before kindergarten and preschool and before high school. the reason you are doing so well is you have a foundation very early on in math and science and language arts that allowed use to succeed even at a very young age. we have to make sure that opportunity is available for all kids. [applause] haul kids. [applause] including this guy right here with the hair. [applause]

that's why we are boosting science and technology and engineering and math education all across the country and that's why we are also working with businesses to train more engineers and revitalize the community colleges so they can provide the workers with new skills and training. finally, that's why we are making sure that all of our children can afford to fulfill their dream of a college education, but they can afford to go to school and that pell grants and student loan programs ensure they don't come out of college with mountains of debt. [applause] so, this is the economy the we need to build. when more innovation as encouraged, education is a national mission and new jobs and businesses take root in america. so that's the long term project.

we still have a short term agenda, and that is putting people to work right now. we have to do everything we can to get the economy growing faster in the short term. that's why i'm asking the members of congress to meet their responsibilities, the media american jobs act right away. there are folks in washington who may be fine waiting until the next election to settle our differences and move forward with the next election as 14 months away. the american people can't wait that long. there's a lot of people out there living paycheck to paycheck even day today. they are working hard and making tough choices and meeting their responsibilities but the need us to do the same so many devotee listening here and across the country to tell congress passed the american jobs act. we can together to pass reform and we should be able to come together to also put people back to work. to all the students at thomas jefferson, i couldn't be more proud of you.

i expect that among you will be incredible scientists and engineers and business leaders, you are going to transform the world and i am just looking forward to taking advantage of the incredible science and technology that you develop in the years to come. if you are our future and whenever i see what people like you are doing, i know that america's future is going to be bright. thank you. [applause] [cheering]

[applause] >> all right i have to sign my name -- [inaudible] usually my signature is better than this but i have to do it [inaudible] [inaudible conversations] you know, i kind of figured it out. [laughter]

[inaudible conversations] alright, congratulations. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ..

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ >> you see the flash and everything in the next thing you hear them cry out in pain. the second thing i hear is coming you know, if i've lost anything special, you know, shoot me.

>> host: and now joining us from our new york judeo is john avlon, a senior political columnist with "the daily beast" and a cofounder of no labels. we'll find out what that isn't just a minute. if we could start with a big issue in washington, the jobs proposal. saying pass this bill now, pass this bill now. speaker potter speaks yesterday at the economic club of

washington and says, reform the tax system now. no tax hikes at this point. what is your assessment of this? >> guest: well, we have got to sort of competing proposals here. i think the president when he gave his job spill speech got a spike because of the way he framed his plan. this is a policy speech and everything was basically a bipartisan proposal, supported by democrats and republicans. after paisley was thing voters want to hear. they are deeply frustrated by d.c. washington work against it they feel like it give american economy can get work again. does that the president claimed the speech that way with meyer. then there are these things, infrastructure bank, reducing the corporate tax rate they lure you in the polls, creative incentives to hire g.i., broad-based support on both sides of the aisle. what is interesting is republicans have the real question to confront in their

support among independent voters is one of the things that state. will they have task is simply because their proposed by the president? john boehner puts forth a plan and i think there's a momentum in washington towards tax reform, which is important. when he says this acts otherwise off the table, tax hikes up the table, the open question is this closing tax loopholes going to be considered a tax hike by this republican conference? traditionally has not been. one of the pink bowl since been proposed. but that's really one of the key issues that needs to be worked out in negotiation, especially the super committee will have any effect. the only way we'll get some broad grin plan, which is what obama was negotiating is if we have some form of entitlement for them. but are the rod fault lines in this debate right now. i don't think it's time for anybody should be trying hard life in the sand because everything has to be on the table if we are going to take

reviving the economy and reducing deficit seriously. >> host: knowing what you do with politics and pass commissions, where do you -- how do you rate the success, potential success of the deck commission? >> we have had successful bipartisan commissions in the past. the commission to do with social security under tip o'neill in the 1980s, which made some reforms and helped keep the system secure insolvent. and the greatest commissions, hoover commissions. you know, the simpson-bowles commission and the gang of six put forth broad proposals that are overlapping and have broad-based support even though they were shot down at the point. the problem with the super committee is the members that were appointed to it that ahead of of the senate. he had not one single member of the gang escaped from the bipartisan group that worked long and hard to come forward with it that would test plan.

the only member of the simpson-bowles commission put forward on the committee were jeff hentai lane and max baucus who both voted against simpson-bowles. so that was a bad start. there were people on the committee welcomed to make a deal. rob portman, republican of ohio. john kerry. but when he saw the people being appointed, the fact that mitch mcconnell appointed pat to me, and from someone like tom coburn, an impeccable conservative who worked both on the gang of six, that sent a bad sign. so i think you always want to hope for the worse, you should hope for the best and prepare for the worst. the reality of congress decided to kick the can to the super committee. president obama and john boehner have encouraged them to rate sites from the 1.5 to something more ambitious, to open the door to tax reform. on one level it pathetic to delegate to super community, but that is part of the reality.

there is common ground to be built on. that's the point of the jobs plan with the bipartisan legislation. but it takes political courage to reach across the aisle and this preclinical environment. that's the responsibility of the super committee. also john boehner and president obama to try to meet their respective sites with some type of agreement to get the economy moving again and put america on longer fiscal footing. >> host: john avlon as their guest in our new york city. if you're watching c-span, you can see the numbers on the screen with the dateline, independents only. really want to hear independence. we want to concentrate on independence, not democrats or republicans. most identified plurality as independents, so we want to hear from you. 202-628-0205 if you're an independent in the time zone.

202-737-0002 if you are independent and live in the mountain and pacific time zones. trade to azeri gas. mr. avlon, recent gallup poll came out and we will show you the end result if we could. the light green line, 52% of americans say that a third party is needed to, the deep green line, 40% say that the two-party system works. why do 52% of americans think that a third party is needed? and what is the influence of independence at this point? >> i think we see a market failure in our politics, a market failure in the two-party system. when the two-party system functions well, it's a stabilizing factor in american politics. the two-party system is not where, when 40% of the american people are proactively rejecting by declaring their independence. i am independent and it's largely a generational thing. very pronounced bunker young

voters. i think the problem is the number of independent voters have increased dramatically, precisely the same time the two parties have become more polarized. to the point where you pull americans attitudes on any issue, independents track more closely to the balance. it's not to split the difference. if you look at independent voters at least the republicans on economic issues and closer the least religious cohort of all. i think the reason the two parties haven't been able to reach out to the rising tide of voters is because they are increasingly beholden to their respective special interests. the religious right in the republican side and the public sector units on the democratic side. so there's a market break down, market failure. the two parties have been put on notice. independent voters are frustrated because of dysfunction. they hate the hyper partisanship in washington. the sense that people are

constantly putting partisanship ahead of petrie could sometimes special interests ahead of national interest. the two parties have been put on notice. the history of third parties in america is a broad one. i think there've been two major occasions in our history, releasing a third party emerge. and that's the republican party in 1860 been one of them, with blank and leading them to their first presidency. at the end of the day, this disconnect needs to be addressed. independents hold the power in american politics. as he said their plurality come the largest and fastest-growing segment. this is not a shuttle shift. if a profound shift in something of a should pay attention to. yet there's so many professional partisans who want to ignore the fact that plurality of americans to reject in the two parties. that can only go on so long. so it's a matter of party leadership and it's really a matter of healing these divides. the two parties are so does partially dominated by special interests and activist class

that makes it difficult to appeal to independent voters who get the problem. the understand the problem and get the joke and they are very frustrated with the way washington is conducting politics by putting party over progress. so this is one of the many challenges we face, but this is the single most important trend in american politics today. it is not subtle. it's not incidental. it should beamish a wake-up call and washington is so invested in the politics of the past. they've grown up at the multiplicity of choice in every aspect of their life and your politics is the last place they are being told they should be content with the choice between brand a and brand b. in the professional partisans are still playing politics by industrialized rules. they have not woken up to reality and at some point they'll have to stop trying to gerrymandering of close partisan primaries, brake assist on an open the process. and that will be a real dramatic

change to local politics more towards the center. >> in august gallup conducted a >> in august gallup conducted a poll, 44% of americans said they were independent. 26% called themselves democrats and 28% called themselves republicans. where does the tea party figure into this independent movement for the independent group? >> sure, this is one of my favorite questions because early on when they saw scott brown win in massachusetts, a lot of people conflated with independent voters because it was simple. one of the reasons people missed what was happening to scott brown as we so often default to the sort of lazy political stereotypes when a few can look at the facts come you get a different sense. massachusetts is one of the 10 states and nation were registered independents outnumber democrats or republicans. the stereotype is just back from a stereotype. so scott brown was able to connect with independent voters and billy pull off a massive,

massive upside. if you like i.t. partiers than i did in my last book, wing nuts, first while the movement began as conservatives concerning the deficit and debt and increasingly over the course of 2009 became infused with a populist conservatism come which has been described in the past by richard hofstadter is a paranoid style in american politics. the thing about tea party voters if they are essentially conservative populists. unlike most independent voters who were sick of the partisanship in washington, many teapartiers would like to see more partisanship. they want the republican party further to the right. that aside, their bridges with independent voters share a teapartiers and republicans in particular with deficits and debt. that's the opportunity. as we've seen for the rest of michelle bob and another leaders of the two-party movement, granted it's a leaderless movement, but they are very

popular. these folks are social conservatives, so the rhetoric the tea party uses to help connect with independent voters has been belied by the fact many of its leaders are simply social conservatives and conservative populists. there is some overlap. the independence of 18 to 40%% of the american public be a model and you do have a lot of libertarians and conservative independent who are in the independent movement to overlap with the tea party. in general, it's most accurate to understand the tea party is a conservative populist movement and that is very different from the impulses behind the rise of independent voters over the last 20 years in particular. >> host: john avlon, what is no labels? >> guest: no labels to hope found last year. our hundred 50,000 people signed up, republicans, democrats like myself who got together because we believed one core idea, that hyper partisanship is hurting our country because it was

stopping us from solving serious problems we face. among the other leaders are mark mckenna, someone who worked on the bush mccain campaign. the clinton administration alums like bill carsten, kiki mclean, the former comptroller general of the united states, david walker, also an independent. what's amazing is all of these people rally because of the powers of the idea, recognition of the hyper partisanship was really polarizing our country and bringing it to paralysis. the deficits and debt ceiling debate coming incredibly dysfunctional debate that brought our country to the brink of default and lead to a downgrade cited by both s&p and ben bernanke is a political crisis exceeded a fiscal crisis confirmed the sense there is a problem in our politics right now. is the problem and that's the impulse behind the labels. what the label is trying to do is really focused not on campaigns, but on governing, trying to create an online army

to help provide support to those folks in congress and the senate who want to reach across the aisle. right now that's the most dangerous place because all you do son of taking buckshot out of both sides. you reach across the aisle in your basic taxi because people think cooperation is collaboration. the other side doesn't want to help you even if you try to do the right thing because he got the wrong letter after your last name. in this environment komodo technology allows us to do, social media, the real promise allows us to aggregate the disaggregated, create an online army who felt voiceless, politically homeless and labels try to aggregate and help influence the debate in washington. that's an exciting team. there's a number of groups popping up right now around the same impulse from the labels have a specific mission, which is to try to leave to more effective governance. as other groups popped up as well. it's an daschle has a group called iraq that u.s. which allows people to find other like-minded folks outside the partisan prism.

a group called americans for light, a different project trying to create and get on the ballot in all 50 states and have an online primary in june of next year to create a bipartisan ticket for president. that is fascinating implications, particularly the ballot line. the ceo of starbucks started a group called upward spiral 2011. we cohosted a national town hall with him. again the ceo saying the partisanship has got to stop. it's hurting the economy. a hundred thousand people called in to the national town hall. you have a lot of people come to the same conclusions of the same time, the hyper partisan as the problem stopping us from solving the problems we face as a nation in that kind of self-inflicted wound is one of the strategic competitors look at around the world and see america unable to govern. when to show they can self govern by reasoning together. it's the oldest idea, the bedrock of our country.

thomas jefferson said every difference of opinion aside difference of principle. when each remember that in current policy debates. we can move the country not left to write the foreword and we need to in a divided government. >> host: first caller for john avlon for "the daily beast" and no labels comes from our independent color in henderson, nevada. >> hi, good morning. >> good morning. >> caller: you know, the dilemma the nation is currently in is basically because of what is going on as everybody knows that the congress. in order to do something about the tax code, it's going to take anywhere from 36 to 60 months to make a change. you get people out there homeless that are going hungry, that needs money, have to pay their bills, but still were talking about the icing on the cake and not what the ingredients are. that's the biggest problem. as far as changing the tax code, the partisans are going to be there because you think the oil

companies are going to allow the tax code to change without putting up a fight. let's face it, with the law the supreme court is passed, making corporations individual, where the heck do we go from here? >> host: mr. avlon. just do what was your name, sir? >> host: ralph. >> guest: i think ralph made some great important points. first of all, focus on the icing and not the case is exactly right. we do a bad job even in the media would get caught horserace and were not doing such a good job of governing. we have sort of forgotten anything coverage of american politics that the campaign as the preamble to the main event, which is governing. and you are right. to that extent we focus on the icing too much and not dictate, not the content. that's where problems are solved. he's right. take a look at the increase in

lobbying dollars in washington over the past 10 years. look at a good sense of what was that the problems we've got. one of things president obama spoke forward with a proposal the republicans have backed in the past, which is a slower the tax rate to make it competitive against international standards. ceos like cisco's john chambers said well, we got to do this. we don't want to be investing overseas, but it simply doesn't make sense for shareholders. but in exchange, let's close some of the loopholes that are creating incentives for folks to do things like move jobs overseas and instead, let's create new incentives to have folks hire workers and things like returning gis. that's something we should agree on. whenever you close loopholes, let's not forget, loopholes are your marks embedded in the tax code if they been put there by lobbyists. in the current logical debate in congress, i debated folks over the last front of themselves

keep partiers. that's a new standard. that's a real problem. a lot of a lot of folks remember it's not a tax hike. you can close loopholes and actually rage revenue. how is that not a win-win if you care about the deficit first? improve the economy, cenobites hiding and deal with deficits and debt. some have hijacked the movement and are trained to call that a tax hike. guess who is behind that at the end of the day? lobbyist to want to keep their special interest and tax. let's be consistent. let's take a marks out the legislation? let's take aramark set up everything in lower rates of this employer,. >> host: republicans have no new ideas. democrats have no new ideas. same rhetoric, no compromise, no new jobs. both sides play games and she

rises 2011 treats both parties are in the pockets of corporate lobbyists. we need the parties. on my views and many others like me. aaron is an independent in arlington virginia. you were on with john avalon. >> caller: good morning, gentlemen. i think i agree with john, but i would disagree with what you said about like the third party tea party that they are too far right extreme. i mean, i came from england. i came to america for the reason a lot of people come to america and that's opportunity. i think the tea party stands for a lot of sentries annoyed because people need to see a change, whether it's republican or democrat. it needs to be just a difference of opinion. you know what i'm saying?

>> guest: let me ask the caller question it based on the line. no question trying to improve the economy, to a deficit and debt is something that bridges to you party rhetoric and beliefs with republicans, independents and centrists. what did the calder make of the leaders for people like men who are not remotely centrist? >> caller: well, obviously she's not the actual leader of the tea party, issued? >> guest: shootout at the the coalition in congress. >> caller: if the new party formed, obviously people veatch of that person. it's difficult to say he would be the leader. >> guest: i think we do know who is popularly seen as leaders of the tea party, but that's my problem. there's a dichotomy through the libertarian rhetoric and impulses of good people which i.t. parting good faith because they say it initially it was all about bush was wrong, obama

sought, we need to get deficit and debt under control to do with generational theft. as a sense of generational responsibility. that resonates with independents. both eocene subsequently been a lot of libertarian rhetoric has faded. they proved to be about an inch deep and it's the same old folks coming up front, concerted populace who are social conservatives. so what i want to see from libertarian friends is getting up to social conservatives. if they believe, let's be consistent about it. so i'd really like to see that. but we know that people like sir peatland and michele bachmann and others as their approval has always been low and they been doctrinaire social conservatives and that's been their first priority, even though bockman's campaign she's always been a social conservatives. >> host: krishnan bmf treats to complain about partisanship is to complain about democracy.

partisanship is the lifeblood of democracy and he doesn't use the word complain. >> guest: well, the problem is not partisanship. the problem is hyper partisanship. it's something new. it's not competing to win an election. i believe competition is healthy in every endeavor. as demonizing people who disagree with you. once the election is over, been unwilling to work together, reason together, give people the benefit of the doubt. many independents believe that neither party has a monopoly on good ideas are good people, that neither party has virtual revising the current hyper partisan environment in washington tends to believe those things, but their sights on the side of the angels and the other is on the side of the devil. it's how democracy breaks down and willingness to work together in reason together. this has happened before in democratic republic spitzer don't just take their rhetoric about people about ways by our

politics. sure, it was first before the civil war and during it, but let's learn from our history. divided government over the last half-century has produced a marshall plan, hiring outcome achievements of the reagan air when tip o'neill was running congress. we turned a deficit into a surplus. these are great achievements and there were plenty of philosophical differences, but at the end of the date they were able to sit together in reason together to say we disagree on a lot from let's focus on things we agree on and define the common common ground that exists, however small, and then build on it. if