that will really determine five, ten, 15, 20 years out what the nature of the network looks like. i wanted to step back for a minute and look from 30,000 feet and talk about cause and effects. i think we can then go back down and talk about specific remedies and ways we can understand where all of this problem actually comes from. >> my next question, the entire several mentioned the questions we can see the tensions that developed across countries as across sectors. so the question is, how can we rebuild trust in international trade and the digital economy? are there particular steps you think we should take that would improve trade and cross border data flows? any of you that would like to

jump in. don't be shy. >> certainly i think from my little world of this surveillance world where so much trust has been lost, especially for users outside the united states, i think the simple but very meaningful steps would include updating u.s. surveillance law. we've got some good vehicles for that. we've got great vehicles right now for reforming the electronic communications privacy act which is one of our domestic surveillance statutes. get it to be consistent with the standards that most companies are complying with any way in the united states. statutes are way out of date. the second is addressing the national security authorities in the united states, u.s. freedom act is one vehicle that does a nice job of addressing concerns. particularly issues of bulk surveillance by u.s. natural

security. those are two very important vehicles that are there ready to be passed and can help reduce the concerns about aggressive u.s. surveillance. i think there's also a great need for the united nations to be better at being able to process requests from other jurisdictions for user data from u.s. companies that hold it. if we can provide a good working avenue for foreign jurisdictions, non-u.s. jurisdictions to get data through a good process with good standards, we'll reduce the perceived need by jurisdictions to enact extraterritorial surveillance laws or put in place data localization. even simple changes to make it so we are the united states better at honoring our treaty obligations under assistance treaties and other vehicles. it can go a long way to reducing

ome of the pressure. >> there's a couple things i want to say. one, i think that we should put this in context and perspective. in the first instance, yes, there have been a lot of moves in the press and discussion about data localization. the biggest threat, most real was in brazil. it was passed earlier this year. there was at one point provisions mandating data localization. those provisions were remove ed from the bill in part because of the recognition within brazil th doing so ha mandating the localization. those provisions were removed from the bill in part because of the recognition within brazil that doing so had negative repercussions for brazilians and that we are seeing that kind of educational process taking place around the world where people see it's not in their self-interest to engage in a battle of politicalization processes. as early as this does we can take to restore some degree of trust for some degree of

collaboration on these issues, the e.u. in the u.s. under the direction of the department of commerce here and their counterparts in the e.u. are working on updated safe harbor for e.u. u.s. transitions on digital data. again i think there's a recognition within the european union that it's as much and there are just as it isn't ours to make sure we have interoperable bit chilly recognized system of distributed information. another step that we are taking is ntia's announcement earlier this year to transfer the vienna contract functions subject to a couple of conditions to ensure we are talking about what is a truly inclusive and truly global participatory system of governance on the dns functions

in the third thing i would talk about his capacity building in those parts of the world where introduction to enter back medications and global network is coming on at a slower pace but now gradually decreasing in africa and latin america and southeast asia. you are seeing around 20 -- 16 to 22% penetration rate at growing at exponential rates. those countries and their governments are asking us and others to help them with building up incident response teams in putting into place the right legal and regulatory infrastructure to ensure information-sharing as possible so you can no one mitigate against attacks and separately the president has announced a series of reforms relative to our intelligence practices and among those within that package of proposals there is proposals to improve the process which is

mutual assistance process in which governments can ask us in access information necessary to the information housed here. again i would go back to the fact that i think what we saw may be an immediate wake wake of disclosures hasn't really manifested itself in a closing or fracturing manner. at the end of the day you see proposals from some authoritarian states to either wolof aspects of their internet or to impose regulatory standards on what people can do and say and transmit transferred across the internet. you don't see that being adopted by a significant portion of the world and brazil's migration in particular the post conference they held earlier this year really manifested itself in the vast majority of participants from the world at that conference. agreeing to the

multi-stakeholder governance and agreeing to the free flow of information across international boundaries so there's a glass half full story to be told here making progress in collaboration and cooperation with our colleagues. >> i would just join in on that and absolutely agree with what dan has said about brazil. it was a good example of how hearing from companies and stakeholders in brazil about the real problem with localization that brazil had proposed had a very positive impact in that instance. i think there are plenty of challenges that remain. i think for example indonesia we are seeing a trend in the opposite direction which is of great concern in a localization area. india remains a huge problem in that regard.

so i think we have plenty of work to be done and i would say from our perspective what we are trying to do and will continue to do is through our active negotiations, the most prominent one being the ppp negotiation center services e-commerce telecom and investment chapters. there are a series of five core positions we think are and do what we are talking about this morning. the first is we negotiated prohibition on tariffs of products that are distributed electronically so that they will not be subject to customs duties and we think that that's something that started in the wto but we have extended through our fta soon we think is a very very core important rule to reinforce. secondly we negotiate

nondiscriminatory treatment of digital projects -- products which can be a pernicious kind of barrier to entry into a market so establishing the more we can make progress there are regional fta is the better. thirdly cross-border information flows, we have a mandatory binding provision and we are negotiating for the first time with tpp that countries are signing up to that requires that they allow free transfer of data flows on a cross-border basis which again goes directly to what we have been discussing today. fourthly we are negotiating a rule which would prohibit their the requirement that countries require servers be located in our own territory and begin we think it cuts right to the heart of the core concerns raised with regard to localization. finally what we do in our services chapter on a

cross-border basis we negotiated on the basis of a negative list and the reason we think is so relevant to what we are talking about today as you want to be able to cover virtually anything. i think as we all know individual innovation is ever presently progressing -- increasing its something we want to encourage. so the more you have trades listed on the negative list you are able to cover new services as they are created and as they grow. we think these elements combine when we are able to pursue them and if we are able to create agreement among tpt countries. we are pursuing requirements with the europeans. we are also pursuing some requirements in the plural services negotiations which we have roughly 24 countries, 48 if you count all the individual e.u. member countries together.

what's important about that is those rules that i have just described if we can propagate them among that large of a group of countries and i think we will go a long way toward addressing or giving ourselves another tool of the toolbox to take on what again seems to be the most pernicious problems of mobilization. finally on the investment fund which again i've been talking more about the cross-border peace that is through the bilateral investment treaties and investment chapters we also believe there are mobile of market access barriers when a company decides it does want to and it makes economic sense and it fits with their business model that they are not barriers to foreign direct investment and is the case of the china example there are not discriminatory requirements that require you to use local technology or use local standards. i think it seems to us that

having those tools, it's not the complete answer. much of what dan has alluded to is also an important part of the whole piece of addressing the issue in terms of multi-stakeholder organizations that we need to develop in terms of internet governance, bilateral bylaws which are also important. all this working together we think can make significant inroads. >> alexa would he think we should do to rebuild trade and economy? >> the internet really bring significant improvement of the productivity and also global trade. recently now people got concerned about cybersecurity and privacy and that is really coming from a certain requirement from different

countries so to that extent i agree. you have to jointly stick together to agree on a standard and a code of conduct as was mentioned earlier and again don't judge the technology of each nation or the product organization from different geographical areas. we have to make sure that's the framework that is established. also today's prosperity and openness of the internet is really because of the contribution from all of the technology companies. the technology companies also need to work together across the international border to make sure we can contribute to such framework. we could have a viable system and technology to enable such openness of the internet.

today again and a success of a global company depends on the trust. if we lose that and use of trust we will use the fundamentals of our business and the prosperity of the world economy. that is very important for us to keep in mind. to make sure the prosperity of the economy and of the industry is there. so i want to say today the fragmentation of the internet is really coming from the concerns of our security and privacy. i have to say that fragmented internet would not bring security protection to the cyber world.

cybersecurity and protecting privacy should not jeopardize the openness of the internet. we have two c. global trade but i agree there's a missing piece on how we are going to ensure the free flow of data in today's world. i think that's also something that needs to be done by different governments. >> thank you. james what are the steps you think we need to undertake your? >> when i think about trust in this context it's difficult in a world now where i can't even trust my new refrigerator which i discovered in my home network with sears did bush leave -- surreptitiously trying to

connect. fortunately i had my firewall. that's what i'm about to get to is that you know the problem and don't be surprised to hear this for me given what i do all day in the intelligence business but for me the basis of trust in my daily life is robust transparent encryption. when i receive messages from people the way i trust those messages are digital signatures of messages. i have been an avid user of encryption for over 15 years and it's been almost a fanatical user of it. i will say i realize this is the trend of the day and people have suddenly discovered encryption. journalists have all of a sudden figured out how to spell encryption. they previously didn't know about it.

mr. greenwald admits that he can award all these treaties for so long but at the end of the day it has to be robust and transparent as to how it's used. the engineering when he says to fade into the background but but sometimes it needs to be front and center but also has to be easy enough for my mother to use. you can only be a crypto paranoid if you can run gsp on the commandline. it has to be something that's baked in at a basic level. i will say i was an apple fan for many years but the recent moves of apple and iowa state where they take the burden of the robust encryption away from the user is a configuration and baked into the way the system was built is going to be the trend of the time. that's to the benefit of everyone that doesn't want to have to spend intellectual capital to figure it out.

a big fan of factorization of pictures and that icloud. there are all these measures coming along and you will see an industry i think that is growing up now and understands there's this desire for it. that will naturally lead and we will be prepared for another clip. going to lead to another reaction that says okay the world needs robust encryption but now what is the legal and privacy in governmental oversight regime that allows for key escrow and everything else that we have to gird our loins and understand that that's coming. we will have that discussion and i think there is a balance. we also have to deal them with the use of cryptography standards as trade weapons. china right now the rise of their nationalist skin -- standard and the insistence of using their market leverage and the fact that so many i.t.

products to use that as leverage to force vendors to make their products compatible with chinese crypto standards with a lot of transparency. via i-5 is a dual web function. when you talk to apple they can't tell you what that does. there could be a word wrapping note in this room and i wouldn't even know. that is not transparent encryption. that is not a transparent standard regime. while i argue for robust encryption we have a lot of work to do in the engineering. >> why don't we open the floor to questions from the audience. i'm used to being worried about the government and now i need to worry more about my refrigerat refrigerator. >> gander toaster. so questions from the audience.

there's a gentleman right here on the i/o. >> i wonder what is the scope and scale of a problem. the issues that we have our democratic countries. understand pushing for avoiding localization because of the requirements in canada. there are also organizational requirements in australia and taiwan. not to talk about organization but the european union although a the more modern because it's requiring their servers are processed data and save countries in a defined as a country so what is the difference between the organizational requirements that you are talking about with china

russia or brazil and the requirements of localization of the democratic countries that i just mentioned? >> anybody want to jump in? christine. >> i will just start by saying i would certainly agree with you that localization is still a widespread problem. i don't agree though that i think tpp and the core elements that i mentioned were designed particularly for canada. we have a much broader concern when we developed those elements which certainly preceded tpp and exist more broadly across the globe. i think we make the same argument with each trading partner that we meet and it's very much along the lines of the

arguments you have heard from helms this morning that there really is an economic case to be made that having localization requirements and local data storage and local server requirements can be self-defeating and can ultimately not have the high-quality of services and competition you want to see in your own economy. i think we made a fair amount of progress for that notion. we are not quite there yet that we have. we are making a similar argument among countries that are participating in negotiations which is a much broader group and it has just begun with the europeans so i agree with you that globalization is not confined to nondemocratic societies.

but it's in democratic societies as well. they argument we make is quite similar though in terms of efficiencies and can we find ways around those requirements? >> the gentleman right here with his hand up. there's a microphone coming from behind you. >> hi. my name is joe hall and i'm the chief technologist for the center of democracy and technology. mr. mulvenon talked about the move towards encryption and more usable forms of consumer security tools. he talked a little bit about sort of the shift as the professor talks about in terms of moving standard capability from being more law enforcement friendly to protecting the user more and professor gene kamm put

it starkly in the sense that she said you know we could mandate that cars should be able to explode on command or the engines explode when being chased by the cops but we don't do that because exploding cars are dangerous. i'm wondering if the panel, if other people or mr. mulvenon have thoughts about the international implications of this stuff and does that put more pressure on the desire to sort of make the process work a little better and are there trade implications of more ubiquitous consumer grade strong crypto security? >> the thing is there's an obvious dilemma which is to say that to argue, because you almost want to say i wish we all had better encryption but the bad guys didn't have better encryption. that's obvious to the problem is that given the level of

insecurity, given the fact that this network and let's be honest. i used to work at rand. he talked about these guys dead in the basement and they say look we never intended for any malicious behavior at all. all of a sudden we have built this edifice in the global economy on top of it and top of that and we been gluing security on the side of it ever since. every once in a while someone will come along and say let's re-architecture whole thing. let's repair the damaged airplane at 30000 feet with a giant hole in the side. difficult, not impossible, kind of a nasa level problem and you know at the end of the day i have circles. there is team mulvenon and then there's my company in the country and so i try to secure the boundary lines that i can secure and if god has the ancillary effect of allowing people to use commercial -- commercially available tools to

be able to do things that i don't like for me that's just the cost. good policies are not cost free policies. good policy sides have caused and for me it's a good policy to have widespread distribution of commercial level security products and then we have the engineering problem that comes along with well what do we do about the fact that people you might not like are going to be using it as well? that's not a reason to then say well we are just going to continue to live in is very insecure world in which every time we swipe a card or put our penance is something we are imperiling our entire financial assistance. >> other questions? michael. >> mike nelson at georgetown university. i'm really glad to hear discussion of encryption and data localization but i thought it would be useful to look at a specific case study of the internet of things. we are moving forward here into a world where there's going to be hundreds if billions of

devices connected to the cloud, bringing data in. from data on my wrist to to the sensor's energy aircraft. how was i going to affect both their ability to implement encryption in some of these devices that might not be able to support robust encryption and how will it change the data localization? will countries want to have more control over the data inside the country or will they give up and realize it's going to go across border and the airplane is going to fly over 40 countries in a day. >> good question. who wants to address the? >> i'm not sure mike if i can answer all that. i would say that i think the trend you are seeing towards encryption in the obvious product for encryption which are communications products, i don't

see that stopping initiative. it's something google has been working on long before the nsa getting as much as we could encrypted between the data center and making it easier for users to encrypt their phones. so i think we are headed towards an understanding, societal understanding of encryption. i don't see why that would not apply to the internet of things. there may be practical issues and there may be differences where the information depending on the thing is not particularly sensitive. like how much milk is in the refrigerator james. maybe it's a subjective judgment but i think the trend towards encryption i think is one that is strong and we are going to see a lot more of it. i have the same concerns that james was talking about which is are we going to relive the crypto battles that we have had in the 90s and i certainly hope not.

if we can avoid that having learned the lessons. >> we have to know it's a that the trendline if you will and i'm not a marxist determinist that the trendline right now is that over time we will increase a world largely for convenience reasons. let's be clear why we have allowed all these technologies to come into her life. i think patrick henry said give me convenience or give me death right? that's why i'm a slave to my smartphone. but we are living in a world just even the last 10 or 15 years in which we are increasingly living in a world in which the mesh of surveillance and wireless interconnectivity is just going to get denser and denser and denser. i thought it was fascinating that dick clarke are couple of months ago was asked what the future privacy looks like in 20 years and he said we are going to live in this ubiquitous sort of dystopia of cctv cameras and

facial recognition on all that stuff in the affluent are going to take vacations in places where there are no cameras. in other words they are going to go to privacy vacations. i don't believe that because the people that are hosting those resource will want to know everything about their preferences so they can better offer services to them. what kind of chocolate do they want but in that world a more comfortable knowing that is a dynamism that's being pushed by social interaction and the economy and the benefits and economies of scale and all these things. in that environment we can set up our own definitions of multilevel security. i don't care if the toaster poster is not encrypted. i just want to toast the bread but i do want my e-mail to be encrypted in my on line banking to be encrypted. so having these kinds -- i think

a believer in the market they think the market will sort out and we have to give the consumer more tools to empower them to sort out how they want that multilevel security to work. so the 10-cent thing but at the end of the day as much as i loved dystopia we are not necessarily moving to skynet. we still have to control the machines. they will decide we are a virus but at the end of the day i want to encrypt mike indication so machines don't know i am all the time. >> if i could at something. the underlying question of what is happening with the size and scope of the dataset and how they are being used to something this administration is taking seriously. most recently john podesta, privatize you can go to ask a question or a big data report.

it presented a balanced view of well look there are serious benefits to be derived for example whether it's the internet of things in writing and have efficiency and have the greatest allocating energy across sectors. you are able to detect and respond to an epidemic much more quickly than he would otherwise or including law enforcement mechanisms by which you can use data in order to produce a public good and makes us all better and happy. now we have to balance that with the fact that it can be used as good things can be used for that so what are those bad things and what can we do about the use of back? they do care about their the e-mail and their finances that are directly related to harm. the information about how it toasts bread leads to little --

the degree to which i make financial decisions or family decisions or health decisions those are very serious private and sensitive aspects of information that can be used to harm you. i think i would again commend the big data report. i would commend not just the court that the department of commerce and the greene paper and ftc white paper when this administration came back into office after many years of not having produced documents not calling for a re-engagement of that conversation. the conversation is taking place all over the world. aipac has some number of investigations and i think at the human rights level you are seeing extensive and serious

discussions. again at the end of the day these are issues we are aware of as an administration. at the same time balancing. >> a question here in the front row. >> i'm with the naval postgraduate school. i don't know if any of you saw the nova show last night. he was on data encryption or whatever in a proposal as i understood it was that there are ways in which you can somehow educate a particular part of your brain and you have to get trained to do this they would somehow handle the encryption. i didn't understand it. it was pretty amazing i wasn't

sure i want to go through it but i too and anxious about giving my credit card and i don't have a lot of money but the idea that this can make us so uneasy. it's so wonderful in so many ways and so anxiety producing and others when you think about when you get these kids that want to get in and play and they can stop the electric system going. you will have an enormous challenge and i want to thank you for working on it but i wish i felt a little safer. [laughter] >> any reactions to that? >> alexander gerschenkron is the only economist i like. he had this great idea. it's actually quite depressing to travel to other countries that were later modernizers in these areas because they been able to leapfrog stages of

development. the fact that i have credit cards in my wallet that are are not shipped them tend is absolutely ridiculous. given the amount of losses in the credit card companies have to write off every year it would be worth it for them to update the infrastructure so we didn't have to have magnetic strip credit cards but it's a legacy infrastructure. a six-year sentence i did in los angeles i remember pat bell bell coming at one point in saying we are we are going to rip all the copyright of the walls include a fiber in some actuary and b fiber in the numbers and never heard about it as we had to replace the much legacy infrastructure. when i traveled to countries that have had the fortunate advantage of being able to go to wireless your really highlights a lot of the issues we had in terms of investments. we are spending stimulus money and bridges that should've been spent on ipe six and things along this line. we are literally playing catch-up to some of the trends

that you see in places where they didn't have those legacy problems. >> in the very back in the corner. >> i am joe marx with political. mr. mulvenon i hope you can expand on something you said earlier about the concerns about national encryption and chinese encryption standards being put into technologies produced in china from other companies. what is wrong with that if the encryption itself is good? >> maybe you can address that and lixin. >> let's go over the history of a whack which is the chinese counterpart to the security system. when it was imposed by the planning authorities in beijing they said to the companies if you are going to produce equipment then you will have a single unified production chain.

you want to have to build a china iphone and the rest of the world i found and couldn't be built in china also a certified by the russian authorities. he and his maker products compatible with this information technology standard in addition to wi-fi. here are a list of 30 companies to partner with and in order to have a partnership after turnover your crypto source code so they can build the apis into the products. turning over your crypto source code to companies associated with authoritarian government is not a global model that i advocate. it has as much to do and i said what i talked about encryption i talked about the transparency of it. there's a great encryption philosophy that says algorithms shouldn't be secret. that's why love public photography. when al gore them a secret it's insecure because all you have to do is figure out the algorithm.

if we are going to have a robust encryption system that can be one i call somebody and i say you know what is the algorithms and i'm told by the management commission breather for a algorithms are state secrets and cannot be disclosed and i don't regard that as the cryptographic standard product i want in any of my belongings. >> lixin do you want to jump in? >> he doesn't need to defend beijing. >> i'm not an expert about the encryption but what i understand from the conversation actually, i believe this particular case for the iphone, the iphone is manufacturing in china but iphone wants to get into china. if you sell the phone in china you need to comply with the local laws. the chinese government requires that you have is to support such

encryption are wi-fi standards. i think that's the key. for us the key today as we are speaking i have 56 advisers in the united states. what we need to do, we need to make sure every single sale and united states complies with the asian laws in the u.s. government. carrier partners and make sure the privacy of the consumers and the requirements come the carrier partners is implemented. for example all wi-fi trips particularly for the united states we always have either call come or other u.s. companies. so i think that's very clear. again we are back to the original question. those are the challenges we are facing as as a global technology company.

no matter if it's a u.s. company or a chinese company we are all faced with the same challenges. that is why we all need to come together. i think the key thing for this short-term for us, we lose economy of scale so we have two different products in china and u.s.. we have to separate it but ideally we should help one sid side -- but unfortunately can't do that today. >> i want to adjust the general concept which is not specific to that particular chip and having two chips doing the same thing in a product. it's the idea that the chinese government making the determination that this is the best chip to use and mandating a specific purchase from a specific providers. that's a problem because you can't have every market in the world imposing that kind of nonvoluntary purchasing and production standard. it ruins opportunities for innovation and it doesn't comply

with the idea that voluntary center should be exposed to the market. no one forces you to buy anything from qualcomm and no one forces you into buying anything from broad come. it's not fair and it's not right. >> you shouldn't have to include chips for standard set of already then rejected by the international standards organization ieee, buy i.t. have and nonetheless forced upon you because of market access requirements and away the way the certification process takes place in the country in terms of getting your product certified even though the standard itself has been rejected is technically inferior and we see this across dozens of different i.t. standards. >> the only reason china can do this is because of the size of the market. the bahamas can't make us use cryptography. >> it has other charms. >> this gentleman here has another question.

>> hi i'm a fellow with the german marshall fund. i wanted to touch on something i think richard said about artificial rules and about the infrastructure. i think that's part of what the disconnect is. a lot of these rules are artificial. these are the social norms, the laws and the social contract which is broken into all these different pieces. this gets back to the westphalian system. it's at odds with the way human society is designed so that's why you are seeing a fractured into pieces. i wondered how you have a global social contract i don't see how you are going to fix some of these. issues are going to keep coming up. we have differing norms on the freedom of speech and the way you do things, the way you enforce law come all these things. this is what the internet is confronting. it's much bigger than just these little pieces so what are the tech companies, the question what are you doing to both figure this out and to understand and to engage and encourage this global debates of

people to talk about how to converge norms and ways of doing things so can all basically get along? the good news is that these technologies are changing social norms. they have changed the way i interact with my children, with my wife and with my friends and co-workers. it's literally changing the way our entire society is working. the bad news is a lot of prophecy hopes at the beginning like the john perry barlow cyberspace idealism has floundered on the fact that in fact these technologies provide just as much interesting power to people seeking to control as seeking to liberate. i remember 15 years ago people talking about how the internet or cyberspace was just going to wash over all these authoritarian regimes. they were so atavistic and

backward looking they'd never be able to deal with it and yet we have been amazed as they responded nimbly to wave after wave of disruptive technologies somewhat more success than others. i've seen it compared to arab spring to china are up shrink to russia but they the end of the day there's more of a push poll. and what's also embedded in your comment is the unintended consequences. we are not on some linear trajectory towards absolute good and peace and happiness. so embedded within some of these technologies are unexpected things. again is the father of teenage daughter zion discovered this when i go through the logs of their social media use and spend an hour of my day doing that n now. so you realize these liberating technologies have pernicious consequences. >> i want to address the basic underlying question.

internet, the end of the day there is literally not a country that has chosen not to connect to the internet. there is discussion by some politicians in some countries about constructing intranets within their country and disassociating themselves from the global internet but that is actually not happening. i think iran had taken some steps to create an iranian internet that their people would only be able to use on iran and would not be connected to the global internet. i don't think that actually ever took off. there were some discussion and rush about it but that didn't take off. what i think we are talking about here is the world wide web which is the application of rights over the internet and services delivered over the world wide web that at times allow people to engage in behavior as human beings that is offensive to people in other jurisdictions. take for example the most recent case with turkey during the last election.

there was a twitter situation in which people were tweeting out things about the candidate running for office in turkey shut down the entire service of twitter. that is since been worked out and twitter is back up and running in turkey. i think youtube and facebook and others have faced similar situations in different markets. for example there are parts of the world works against a lot to say something bad about the profile -- the prophet mohammed that people do it on facebook and twitter what time. it's up to those service providers that are simply a service on the larger internet to work with those governments and where they can if within the constructs of their ethics epics in their terms of service work something out to ensure there's a mutual respect of the service delivery. again i don't want to conflate that with the idea that there are islands of nonconnectedness in the world. technologically they are not based on internet protocol.

it's simply not happening. there is no armageddon that sounds but that underlying question of how do you make sure that human behavior in your country that you think is outside the scope of your particular laws and jurisdictions is addressed, that is one of the most challenging questions we have. those are questions that serious providers work out with specific countries. for example like pandora's not accessible or netflix in certain parts of the world because of copyright rule. i think these are things that are being worked out in a wide variety of areas but our goal in her underlying work is to obtain a single global network in which individual at device can connect to any single device anywhere in the world. what people do with that connectivity is a separate question of law and we are working out how to manage that. at the end of the day there has been a lot of talk about the

complex and the degree to which some countries trust the international telecommunications commission and i cam which is a nonprofit corporation incorporated in los angeles. i cam is 150 years old. to some degree it's an evolution and a back-and-forth about what's necessary to make sure that you keep the underlying things that work extremely well about the internet and provide extreme public benefits to innovation and jobs and freedom of expression while at the same time ensuring you are respecting everyone and their governments were involved in this connectivity. >> it's not just a technology problem. it's a lot bigger. >> i will say though that there's an interesting countervailing problem that came up recently which is when you have a company that provides a social media service that has

become a virtual monopoly in many markets like twitter and then unilaterally decides to shield its users from disgusting videos videos of isis savage is beheading people which i did want to see and i didn't want their children to see either but it's an interesting thing whether there's a role for government in the sense that who's to say the twitter got to decide that they were going to run software to find these pictures and make sure users couldn't get them. you could say they will just switch to a different social media outlet. twitter has an economy of scale monopoly and at some level do i want them deciding what the social norm is an what's the social standard in other areas? what are the other things they're going to do not for legal reasons or copyright reasons that particular because of the sense of what they think the social standard should be. >> i would disagree that twitter has a virtual economic monopoly.

it simply does not. the barriers to entry into this particular market or nothing reflective of a monopoly situation and the fact that you can access anything the twitter puts on facebook or any number of other nonsocial media sites points of information on the internet. i think there has been a lot of talk in europe and other places about the idea that google or facebook or other companies constitute virtual monopolies that's an economic term or specific definitions and is just not accurate. >> in the same way you could say myspace have a monopoly and i won't use the word monopoly. had a preponderance of the market that went away very quickly. twitter tomorrow could vanish off the face of the earth as have many other social media services because they simply became passé. my children will never put a facebook account of because that's what -- that's what middle-aged people like me do. eventually facebook is receiving

history. but the community that's been created on twitter has quantity has a quality all its own so to defect from twitter and say because i disagreed with their enforcement of the social standard means i'm not going to use twitter means now i voluntarily cut myself off from an economy of scale that is beneficial to me because i could use the crowdsource and everything else. i have some market option not to use twitter but there are costs are not doing that. there were not alternatives of a similar social scale so the legal term anopoli you may not be correct but in terms of the actual performance and use of that service i think the same idea is a debatable concept. >> okay i think we have time for one more question. the gentleman right up there with his hand out. >> thank you and thank you to all the participants were being

here and speaking with us. my name is anthony and then with a cybersecurity firm's divalent. i have a question particularly for the ambassador and christine bliss. you had mentioned that everyone is an equal participant in the web on the internet. you mentioned the education taking place to realize that the localization laws are actually not beneficial as well as mentioning the different aspects of negotiations that are being put in place to improve information data flow and trade. but i'm wondering what the u.s. is doing to actually improve trust because i think that trust takes much longer to build than it does to be lost.

and in the wake of the snowden revelations i think a lot of trust in the u.s. as a quote unquote equal participant on the internet has been lost on wondering if you could speak to that. >> the great closing question. >> i think in terms of the question of what are we doing to restore trust you have to break that down into trust between users of the internet around the world and the american government trust between governments themselves or trust between users and commercial entities. when we talk what equal participants on the network what we are talking about is networks that are open. the fact that we do so disproportionately well is true but that doesn't mean our access is greater than that of others.

we have made significant investments in networks but the europeans are -- have a pretty robust network and we are trying to an courage the development of robust numbers around the world particularly towards america and southeast asia. economies of scale and network efficiencies rally for everyone else. in terms of how do we restore in the first instance the user trust relative to what the american government is doing in the wake of snowden. the present united states has spoken on this on multiple occasions. the present united states is committed to civil liberties. that is where he comes from. he used to teach constitutional law at harvard university. he has exposed and had our intelligence practices review five independent experts and our subject to hands-off.

they made their recommendations and a significant number of those recommendations. what he has said is he in these processes will respect the privacy of individuals. how do you implement that ensure other people except that that's true is going to be a long process. in terms of trust between governments there are number of governments that have expressed extremely significant concerns on which we have been working in a bilateral manner to address the concerns to the best of our ability between intelligence experts in between their operators and hours. germany and brazil are too and we continue to do that work on a bilateral basis. the other thing we do is they go out to the world. we go out to the freedom on line coalition and the human rights council. because of any number of different venues in which people are welcome and participate in the conversation and they are welcome to challenge the practice of the united states.

again this is an evolutionary process. last year there was a human rights council proposal adopted unanimously proposed by germany and brazil and i'm sure they will be coming back with additional proposals. we will continue working out what is appropriate. >> i would just add to that that is trade negotiators being able to build and maintain credibility is one of the most basic things we have to be able to do to do our jobs. i think that's a continual challenge that we face and considered to be very important. so i think across-the-board any negotiations we are engaged in we are trying to do that and continue to build on relationships that we have created. the other thing i want to say is i think part of our job is also education and i just wanted to say as we wrap up here a lot but

certainly has informed the work we do i think in the last two or three years there were some excellent studies that have really a think helped us understand how digital trade has transformed our economy and the degree to which our gdp, our employment and their wages are being impacted by the growth in digital trade. it's really quite amazing when you look at the figures. if you look at the itc studies that have been done on digital trade, u.s. gdp has grown by 3.5 to 4.8% based on 2011 figures. u.s. wages have increased by as much as 5%. so the real country benefits and again that's u.s.-centric but there are other studies like the

kinsey study on digital trade that created what we found very interesting in that connectivity index. if you look at that what they found was the more connected the country was the greater the benefit it enjoyed from increases to gdp across-the-board by 40%. in so again i think that's part of what we are trying to communicate. a sense awareness together and that yes we as the u.s. enjoy benefits but so does the rest of the world. >> we will make that the final word but i want to thank daniel christine lixin and james were sharing their thoughts with us and thank you very much for coming out. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] ..

>> >> and number two he is a republican. no republican has been governor since 82 that was the last time that happened there are no republicans holding in a statewide office currently.

so obviously as a republican in and not very well known on the state level he has an uphill battle ahead of him. >> we have been tracking some advertisements has been negative from your standpoint? >> this has not been overlaid dash campaign so far. there is still one month to go comparing it to the senate race which as gotten fairly nasty. the governor's race first of all, there has not been a lot of bad at this point. we could see more but both candidates are very good at talking policy and had a to its in though wonky way so put them together in the same room they will get a senior but to cable stick

fairly closely to the issues to have a fairly simple discussion. >> you have the one state that has voting and what does that mean with voter >> as a permanent absentee balloting a everybody gets the ballot through the mail. said you have about three weeks until you turn it in. you can fill it out and mail it back or if you don't want to pay for the stand you can drop off at local offices. and is barely easy you don't have to request it be sent did just automatically, said

there are no voting booths on election day we almost on even refer to it as the deadline to cast the ballot because your vote counts just like you throat -- send in the ballot but you have to be careful postmarks do not count if you put your ballot in the mail on election day it will not be counted because it would not arrive intel after the election. new don't trust the post office but instead drive it down which people do. >> so claiming to seek a fourth term? so hoping that the public is tired of him?

>> so that is part of the national trend but has or since for years ago. he says he has the experience to carry the state for word another four years. and does the knowledge the rollout for the health insurance exchanges not the brightest but to despite the web site that never did work properly. and with some of his policies. and richardson says we could have done with the today

$50 million and what is the subject of lawsuits between the vendor and oracle. the portraying itself as a more hands-on governor and being at the governor's mansion that is what they do most of the time that portrays himself as pragmatic that is also a social conservative. >> thank you. >> you're welcome.

>> i watch c-span almost every morning and you do a great job with the programming that people are good and the topics are good but i would like to see somebody from both sides of the opinion. people have commented but it is so much more informative. but i will turn it on. but you could be awesome. >> c-span needs to get more liberal type smart commentators with world affairs.

and contracted to a liberal point of view of the government and the world. and then to give a little more balance. >> thank you for your balanced coverage and then everybody has their say that it is very much appreciated in our democracy. >> iambs of disappointed since he changed the format i can no longer see who is speaking with the topic without getting an out of bet because i cannot see it i am upset about that. >> i really do like c-span

>> i am for my mom on nebraska at one point in time find a contract with united states government we will go to battle. >> when you talk about homeless veterans and the of veterans cemetery and hospital you hear their name. >> thank you for caring to give us the opportunity to serve them.

>> i approve this message. >> my father taught merely like never forget choose to serve the nation. >> and shut down the government well on the battlefield and projected perks like taxpayer paid health care for life for cutting veterans' care. >> fighting to keep our neighborhoods safe and strong to secure grants for community policing to crack down on human trafficking and to empower activist with the do fm radio station giving up voice to a community.

working hard to keep us safe. >> i'm not running for congress to represent any political party but to make a difference for nebraska. it is not one easy step i will work from day number one to create a group to solve problems just like i have done. >> according to a report submitted european citizens are fighting for is on the group's. and with the emerging threats looking for a the potential to return to their home countries to commit terrorist attacks. this is just over one hour.

[inaudible conversations] >> i call this hearing to order. this is the subcommittee on emerging threats and today

we will be discussing an emerging threat to europe which is the area they we are focused on but also to the world. and handled differently to ask why ranking member if he would move forward. and i will ask my colleagues >> faq for holding this important and timely hearing. and i take our witnesses and i am pleased you could join us. we have a long history in

massachusetts and so happy to see his legacy move on. today's hearing is relevant given the proximity of social networking the internet am propaganda for premiere tools the tools are cheap and effective steven for groups as seemed to have plenty of resources for this reason that it's part of the counterterrorism strategy should focus on assets of recruitment and communication strategies this is when the roots of the problem for decades and why we must attack. course made the correction -- cooperation of regional partners the national counterterrorism center estimates as of this month as many as 12,000

individuals have traveled to support the armed militants state it is more than 100 american is. expect these numbers to be higher overseas. here is a barometer and we must continue to work to facilitate better information sharing. and then for fighters traveling through the mideast. interagency cooperation will undoubtedly be put to the test with the threats and i for one will be a strong advocate for incorporating local law enforcement with

the blood supply air effect there is a larger piece of the puzzle. and they go on to rape and kill that comes to bear. as the trans-atlantic community to determine the causes. and with that cultural history will be important to find their true identities. that was propaganda seeking to destroy. of the controversial is important that our of countries that have been effected and impacted doing

what they can do? are they protecting those of their own population region to be coerced with these activities? a to partner are where you could do to curtail such activities with zero tolerance for extremas them to go unchecked at home as well.hv please evaluate the capabilities of our partners who are more prone to attacks by radical groups than we are. and going across the world for wealthy or poor communities of all educational levels not only targeting terrorist groups in to go over this type of

division to include both genders not only ben of women who play an integral role in lake extremist groups women are growing up increasingly conservative closed environment the subject of today's hearing is of utmost concern to our own national security and now i think fed chairman and deal back. >>. >> and then go to syria and iraq and the threat that they pose to return to europe and how does that impact us in the united states as well? in 2011 the syrian people

rose up in revolt and over three years later it has van torn apart by sectarian strife. with radical islamic terrorist groupsu8 taking folic vantage of the chaos. possibly as many as 15,000 foreign fighters with 80 different countries to take up arms in the fight. well appears that several thousand of those came from europe and hold passports many have joined isil a-k nizam brutal anti-western terrorist organization in

both syria and iraq. and which controls the land improvement abilities on the battlefield also one of the richest terrorist groups in the world. with extortion or black-market oil sales and of course, the easy capture or the gift of vast amounts of america's military equipment that we have generously provided iraq. this is a of mega million-dollar operation on their part. it is a nightmare to think about that kind of attacks isil could pull off given the financial resources the geographic safe haven and access to so many recruits with western passports.

to tell us all we need to know about the intentions of this terrorist organization. the terrorists holding the knife in the be heading videos spoke with a british accent. that indicates the magnitude that we face. we have already begun to see the threat of terrorism with those citizens and was indicted to support isil in new york state.

interested also a and the balkans to aid isil to conduct terrorist attacks in the west. but perhaps it is a little too soft maybe we should understand what a terrorist attack in the west means the bodies, a brutal tearing apart of the bodies of women and children and civilians and people who want to live their lives. this group of other human beings will at random murder fellow citizens and people who live in western countries. and also the motive that ray talk about jews terrorizes western civilization at of a huge session of the of

globe. those who travel to syria shot and killed four people in a jewish museum in brussels. those victims were ordinary people could be any of us. during the discussionz we will learn why the bloody message of hate and violence attracts far too many european muslims. what are the of viable options in this situation and how we prevent them and to conduct this type of a horrible murder on innocent people in society. how to work with our european allies or better

yet and russia to defend ourselves against the shared threat? finally let me doped we would do well to do from europe's immigration experience as a talk about reforming their own laws it is not of a counterterrorism but how different people can get together in a society we have a lot to cover so with that i turn to my ranking members or other members who have short opening statements and i yield. >> isis is the threat that has to be reckoned with. i fear the united states

under estimates. the set up governments and northern iraq and syriafm to govern the community they have oil and money and our fighters to have a lot of equipment already the united states has given the equipment well try a -- trying to trade them the first time they cut and ran many believe they just threw down some small arms into cough running. not so here is a tank the iraqi government was given by the united states they bailed and now isis controls the tanks belonging to the american citizens here is the parade after they captured, these abandoned

with what we subsidized these are for american raid given to the iraqi troops to fight isis now this is on a syrian truck to fight is syria way underestimate who these people are. prices are already coming back to europe germany held its first trial of her german-born jihadist and he killed three people at the jewish museum and david cameron said last week there has already been six planned terrorist attacks and the threat will not stay in europe as steel strike and civil and he found out this week because many individuals could travel to the u.s. with their visa. we have to work with friends

and must convince them is said a group to be reckoned with as a threat to all civilized people. they cannot be allowed to return home to continue jihad. i have introduced a foreign terrorist organization passport revocation act for this purpose. it calls for the state department to revoke[y passports for those fighting for any foreign terrorist organization are supporting them in any way. american citizens are traders and not welcome back to the u.s. >> witnesses i appreciate you being here. in lieu of what is going on

radical we have heard reports suspected reports of things happening so as to think about the boston marathon bombing the way it is unacceptable. in lieu of the middle east talk about isil coming here they said they are coming to america we have to pay attention to not allow that to have been. they have to be dealt with to secure our borders i like to hear ideas in addition to the passports that travel over there we introduced a bill this week that it sounds like other members have done that will strip

citizenship away from people that i've picked up against american citizens. and what to do to make÷ our country safer. >> we have to agree to witnesses in law of of a great discussion after your testimony. we have a senior fellow with defensive democracies and senior editor of a publication that tracks counterterrorism issues of what the respected expert and he writes and contributes to "the weekly standard" to make guest appearances on television and radio and has appeared

before other foreign affairs committee hearings and we're pleased to welcome him to the subcommittee. also with us we have the fisher family fellow at the kennedy school of government that was appointed 2009 as the first ever special representative to the muslim communities by secretary of state clinton. she works in that capacity works on behalf of the united states government. for her achievement she was awarded the distinguished honor award in 2013 prior to her appointment she hold senior positions for international development and the state department of

europe -- eurasian affairs also working as the director$y of initiatives for the national security council and got her degree from tufts university. first we will hear from? it is a tossup. we will go with you. >> good morning. thanks for inviting me here today mr. chairman and members of the subcommittee on europe and eurasia it is my honor and pleasure to be here today with this important and timely hearing. of a senior fellow at the kennedy school of government my opinion and verbal testimony are my own.

have come before you today to talk about the threat of fighters returning to europe and was denied his states could and should be doing about it as a political appointee in the position the obama administration i spent a decade working on extremist ideology. i saw firsthand the complex process by which extremist pray and threatens stability worldwide in jay area this year i wrote books to explain why had seen to win the war against extremism i firmly believe we can win. of a proud american and i know firsthand of the men and women who serve the nation with passion and commitment and steadfast determination and to keep us safe i will work with and for them. also the respect of our

presidents have for all faith both administrations have openly stated that open and act of terrorist does not represent the religion of islam. my interest of extremism is not typical i certainly h. w. bush legislation and it was there in 1983 to focus on national security and awarded during an unstable time. conducting interviews as militants and enders stands the power of ideology and the impact on the older culture and way of life. i stayed in massachusetts but felt called to serve after the events of 9/11 and was trying to define my country and religion i could not sit back and watch. for more than a decade i worked closely on extremist

tenure of a danish cray says raquel we found ourselves unprepared for the reality something that happened in copenhagen could have an effect on the of life van poppel. then tranthree asked me to

>> >> instilling the intellectual vacuum created by the crisis and government was ill-equipped. a similar dynamic would unfold before our eyes to is more violent implications. in order for isil or other

organizations to persuade someone to join its are made they must appeal emotionally to a young person eager for a sense of belonging i want to make five points related to foreign fighters in what america could do to fight back. those men a and women are at risk yesterday there is a new report that a teenage girl who's joined isil is now pregnant that shows the change in the landscape. policy makers should be concerned not just for individuals to fight the with the ideology that continues to spread among those left behind. third european civilization does not distract national identities and a uniform way as a result to be new ones to the policy approaches.

we can win the ideological war by investing significantly in soft power. five. free borders did not represent the whole story. free ideas go round of world keeping hatred turning. free ideas could feed a more virtuous cycle of peace and respect for others. and comprehensive attention to change the patterns of discourse within muslim communities as positive consequences for the united states and allies. extremist ideology is the biggest threat of our time degeneration a risk is global and digitally connected and to address the ideological threat head-on to stop it from happening. it is winnable a freebie gave proactively and creatively and smartly.

thanks for the opportunity to speak. >> thoughtful testimony and i'm sure we will have some serious questions. now to the next witness. >> thinks for having me here today to talk about this issue reid have been talking about for fighters for about wild now going back 2011 and 2012 it is stunning we have more foreign fighters is serious than the jihad that is the incredible metric. this creates security challenges i have paid nuanced view of this we're right to be concerned that

most will not come back our way they will remain invested in the fight those that become disillusioned they become partners to dispel the of lithology buzz of grandiose quest that can become our messengers you tell people to go off to fight is not that great. as the four fighters increase -- ford fighters increase we don't know views under direction to be known as a psychopath could go back to europe and to your point these individuals are traveling around and was

identified in 2013 by the french as a risky and was still able to move around quite freely. the second threat is more nuanced policy back to pre-ned 11 afghanistan those that went through the training camps there were trying to identify the most talented and dedicated recruits to repurchase in the west these individuals identified as totally committed and skilled but what is interesting they originally would wage jihad in chechnya. this is how a jihad could

repurchase very quickly so as the talent level increases the professional terrorists set to the pile to figure out who is the best report by u.s. officials say the islamic state does not pose the in the - - a threat but the consensus seems to be fe cannot plant at the moment but i would pause. history tells us these open very quickly going to lead direct threat within nine months. we did not know that the mastermind of 9/11 was the operative and tells several months after so we know the intent is there such as

because they don't have that ability does not mean they cannot in the near future. but everybody is concerned about isil it is a major aim to watch a rampage across to nation states that greater near-term threat is the al qaeda operatives right now that they're very worried about catastrophic a chance - - attacks against us with an official branch and the arrival of isil today this is out complicated as it comes from multiple directions. you have skilled operatives to syria to routes carefully sorted through the recruits.

that is the bigger near-term concern. >> is deeply embedded against the regime. there was of vote on funding and training for the rebels but my one caveat is it is not isil there post but yet al qaeda so it is as complicated game. i don't hear a lot of discussion about that we just have to be careful about how we do that. finally there was the suicide bomber earlier this year to put himself up.

again he managed to travel to and from his home in florida as he was it indoctrinated and recruited now he decided not to use a minute attack but you can bet that they learn to what they could use that information and is the future. we should think about that. thank you. >> i think both of you. i will yield to my ranking member. >> we see in a continuing for the inception of ideology how to carry these things out i appreciate

that. want to focus on a shared commitment with the administration to strengthen women's rights to empower women and their families in traditional societies and part of that stems from the flourishing and the chairman and myself with the importance of women and extremism and the name of that you mentioned with sisters against violence you touched on that but women are the first educators of their children in a unique position to spot signs of radicalization and extremism and also in a position to deal with it and to have to of power women to recognize

this and give the tools how to deal with that but with the sisters against violent extremists them and the overall effort to use women and mothers more effectively to fight against extremism to squash that ankle? >> i talked to what about the ideology but i did need to explain how important family is. but to look to that identity that millenials are experiencing something to why i said the numbers are massive. one-fourth of the plan is muslim. 62% of that number is under the age of 30. looking at their life in a different way everybody has

the identity crisis but something specific is happening to regeneration in growing up in the context of 9/11 asking questions parents and grandparents did as they deal with prolonging fe are looking for answers and it is not traditional. it is that as an end to answers a lot of the questions. women are important becausebr the mother is the chiles first teacher. they see changes happening. looking at that radical process parents have seen signs mothers talk about seeing as how they influence the ecosystem.

there is another piece how you use women to mobilize their perspective copley. that is where we begin to look as models said the grass-roots level. was not a permanent and with the of them. so we began to sing'' what have been if we build of network travel with the windfall woman whowo was given up a grant to do get it off the ground. all these years later it is the independent organization with chapters all over the world but to build a network

of women to push back and talk about things to put those lessons on the table. the other is what is happening to muslim women. >> that was my second question. >> as my role one of the most impressive was what i thought had have been did europe as the identity crisis not just minorities but also to muslim majority countries as well some of the idea to argentina it matters paul klee because people ask questions that these women have the picture.

they are connected to get ideas around bouncing around the world. i saw a change i began to do stink about themselves so you can use women two-step system of radicalization. the other point is we are beginning to see women being radicalizedpe. >> that is the irony because many of these groups are anything but high of low-level of power however uc isil use women not necessarily as soldiers but in an special networking communication where the

average age is 25 years old. so if you could just continue that is the point i wanted to make. >> that age group is pivotal because they are mothers them solves -- and sells either you are open and they engaged or retreats and comeback so let's get that datapoint also what they're looking at matt online how they see themselves.js does not take a lot of imagination and. this summer isis had the all woman organization if we use our imagination is very scary. >> give the point even with the boston marathon bombing it is clear the mother had

said on his radicalization night. i will not comment since there is the trial pending but thank you. i yield back. >> things for your questioning. >> thanks for your testimony. you are right we see this have been out. you say most of the radicals don't come back we don't need most of them we know there were 19 people that they could change quickly and what i have seen is an escalation of radical groups in to a stronger force well organized well funded with

isil getting three plan $5 million per day of societal of oil on the black market. we will see more of that. in this meeting room we had a group representing minnesota is where they are from. why would they choose minnesota? they said education and jobs that would ask what percentage of the male population were employed he said it was very low. what percentage graduated from high school? very low. how many practicing muslim? a majority.

tuesday following sharia law? he said we go with constitutional law but sharia. are they assimilating to become americans to adapt our1b ideologies? he said we have a hard time with that because we grow that. the person from florida and minnesota to become radical jihad. this goes back to a bigger problem with the immigration policy. real one and immigration that we have to do right going back to the isil threat to remove the passports one of the question is i have is, i've lost my train of thought how

did it help the european allies for the returning foreign fighters? the ted go and come back. if they are a u.s. citizen and britain has already started to take these passports away? >> yes they have security restrictions to put in place. with that i will yield back i appreciate your time. >> a couple of questions. are these the uneducated of those you can get jobs in very well educated.yñ

and not necessarily a project of schools but of the noted choices their religion is better than ever but a else's. >> it is not easy to typify the crew in that regard highly educated, from good families you find this over and over not within a socio-economic factors. >> i will note that it is vitally important we do not try to lump all muslims into the category of terrorist otherwise we do exactly what

dichotomy between the western world and all muslims to expand dramatically their strength and potential danger. we need to reach out. you were talking about the muslim she immunity and said crisis? >> career is a real threat to have. >> one of the things for us to do understand it is this is happening what communities can do.c@

>> u.s. courier important question and to are these people? we are do they come from? i was talking about the nuanced approach to understand us a distinction with europe of which generation are really talking about? how do they look at that particular issue? the success will come from the community level and look at the response how government is that the threat. but to protect every have to make sure.

>> clicking very deep and all of these issues suspect including the group's over the history of the planet. and muslim extremism with the word is long associated with radicalism but to be respectful of their face but we cannot help but notice the people murdering people are doing so in the name of their faith. it pulls on a lot of us.mz i'm a muslim people who are wonderful people and i don't think but added to their life. but obviously they identify the islamicó; faith