k out. because too many young americans have already lost their lives and their lands in afghanistan -- limbs are i and others have been there since the beginning and we can't allow their deaths to be in the. so i strongly urge you when you counsel the president, to do the right thing. and we all know what the right thing is, and i thank you for being here today. senator reed? this hearing is adjourned. thank you general. [inaudible conversations]

that is live at 12:25 eastern time on c-span2. >> here is some of the featured program for this president's day weekend on the c-span networks. on booktv saturday morning at 9:00 live coverage of the savannah book festival, nonfiction authors and books on topics like the disappearance of michael rockefeller, a british company of the elephants in world war ii and four women spies during the civil war and at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards former senior adviser for president obama david axelrod on his 4 years in politics. on american history tv on c-span

3, saturday morning in beginning at 8:30 the 1 notedanniversary of the release of the film the birth of a nation. setting with an interview with dr. declare. a showing of the film followed by a call in program with civil war historian larry jones and declare and sunday at 8:00 on the presidency george washington portraits focusing on how artists capture the spirit of the first president and what we can learn about him through their paintings. find the complete television scandal at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call 2026263400, e-mail us at comments little c-span.org or send a tweet to c-span has tag comments. join the conversation like a son facebook follow us on twitter. c-span2 providing live coverage of the u.s. senate floor proceedings and keep public policy events and every weekend booktv for 15 years the only television network devoted to nonfiction books and authors.

c-span2 created by the cable-tv industry and brought you as a public service by your local, cable a satellite provider. watch us in hd, like a son facebook and follow us on twitter. >> yesterday fbi director james comey talk about law enforcement and race relations at georgetown university saying the country is at a crossroads after several low-profile killings of unarmed black men at the hands of local police. he is introduced by georgetown university president john de goia. this is just under an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen please welcome to the stage john j. de goia, a edward montgomery and james comey, director of the

federal bureau of investigation. [applause] >> good morning and welcome to gaston hall. it is a pleasure for the university to host this important conversations this morning. i wish to thank members of our georgetown community and gas from the fbi who joined us for today's event. we are gathered here to hear james comey offered his perspective on questions of law enforcement and race. topic that demand our most careful and serious attention as a nation as members of the community. this is that topic whose importance and urgency has been exemplified in the events from ferguson, missouri to cleveland ohio to staten island, new york and communities across the country.

at this current moment when the country seeks to greater understanding, renewed sense of responsibility for one another, stronger mutual trust, we are grateful for this opportunity to provide a dialogue on these matters. we are thankful to have the school of public policy as an academic partner for this morning's event and after a director james comey's remarks not audience will ask questions moderated by our school dean and word montgomery and i think montgomery for playing this role today. we should take a few moments to direct -- to the introduce james comey, a religion mayor at columbia law school, james comey has served as u.s. attorney for the southern district of new

york and as deputy attorney of the department of justice before assuming his current role. as leader of the fbi he has advanced the bureau's mission of protecting the lives of our nation's citizens with personal attention to assuring this mission is accomplished in a manner that recognizes and protects the liberties that are at the heart of our shared values as a nation. for many years the fbi has required all its new agents to visit the united states holocaust museum here in washington as part of their training. james comey became director, he added to that treating a visit to the martin luther king memorial not far are from campus here to bring a deeper understanding of our nation's history into the bureau's current practices. as james comey put it a reminder of the need for fidelity, to the rule of law and the dangers in becoming untethered to oversight

and accountability. wheat gathers this morning as we have throughout our history for more than a century this hall has served as one of the important places for public discourse and discussion in washington and today we deepen that history as we come together to engage in this dialogue. it is through such a dialogue that we build a more inclusive society and strengthen the trust that forms the fabric of our collective well-being. so ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming director james comey. [applause] >> thank you president de goia thank you for inviting me to georgetown university. i am honored to be here. i wanted to meet with you to share with you my thoughts on

the relationship between law enforcement and the communities we serve and protect. like a lot of things in life that relationship is complicated. relationships often are. he of the hall, part of an all around where we sit now was named after this great university roger kimball 9th president, patrick francis he. he was born into slavery in mount georgia in 1834. his father was an irish immigrant plantation owner, his mother a slave. under the laws at that time he lee and his siblings were considered to be slaves. he is believed to be the first african-american to earn a ph.d. the first to enter the jesuit order, the first to be president of georgetown university work and the predominantly white university. given georgetown's remarkable history and that of president

believes this struck me as the appropriate place to talk about the difficult relationship between law-enforcement and the communities we are sworn to serve and protect. with the death of michael brown in ferguson, the death of eric garner in staten island and the ongoing protests throughout the country and the assassinations of nypd officers we are at a crossroads. as a society we can choose to live our and lives every day raising our families, going to work and hoping that someone somewhere will do something to ease the tension this news over the conflict. we can roll up our car windows, turned up the radio and drive around these problems or we can choose instead to have an open and honest discussion about what our relationship is today. what it should be, what it could

be, what it needs to be. if we took more time to better understand one another. unfortunately in places like ferguson and new york city and in some communities across this nation there is a disconnect between police agencies and the citizens they serve, predominately in communities of color. serious debate partaking place about how law-enforcement personnel relate to the communities they serve, about appropriate use of force and about the real and perceived biases person within and outside law enforcement. these are important debate. every american should feel free to express an informed opinion, to protest peacefully, convey frustration and even anger in a constructive way. that is what makes this democracy great. those conversations, as bumpy and uncomfortable as they can be help us understand different

perspectives and better serve our communities. of course they are only conversations in the true sense of that word. if we are not willing to talk but to listen too. i worry this incredibly important difficult conversation about race and policing has become focused entirely on the character of law enforcement officers when it should also be about something much harder to discuss. debating the nature of policeing is very important. i worry that it is become an excuse at times to avoid doing something harder. let me start by sharing some of my own hard truths. first, all of us in law-enforcement must be honest enough to acknowledge that much of our history is not pretty. at many points in american history law-enforcement and force the status quo a status quo that was often brutally unfair to disfavored groups. it was unfair to the lease

siblings and countless others like them. it was unfair to too many people. i am descended from irish emigrants. a century ago the irish knew well how american society and law enforcement viewed them, as drunks, ruffians and criminals. law enforcement's biased view of the irish lives on in the nickname we still use for the vehicles we use transport groups of prisoners. it is after all the patty wagon. the irish had some tough times, but little compares to the experience on our soil of black americans. that experience should be part of every american's consciousness and law enforcement's role in that experience including in recent times must be remembered. is our cultural inheritance. there is a reason that i require all new agents and analysts to study the fbi's interaction with dr. martin luther king jr. and visit his memorial in washington

as part of their training and there's a reason i keep on my desk if copy of attorney-general robert kennedy's approval of j. edgar hoover's request to wiretap dr. king. it is a single page. the entire application is 5 sentences long. it is without effect or substance and is predicated on but naked assertion that there's, quote, communist influence in the racial situation. the reason i do those things is to ensure that we remember our mistakes and learn from them. one reason we cannot forget our law enforcement legacy is the people we serve and protect cannot forget it either so we must talk about our history. it is hard truths that lives on. second of hard truth, much research points to the widespread existence of unconscious bias. many people in our white majority culture have unconscious racial biases and

reactive really to a white face and a black face. in fact, we all, white and black carry various biases around with us. i reminded of the song from the broadway hit avenue q everyone is a little bit racist. the part of which goes like this, look around and you will find no one is really colorblind, maybe it is a fact we all should face, everyone makes judgments based on race, you should be grateful i did not try to sing that. but if we can't help our latent biases we can help our behavior in response to those instinctive reactions which is why we work to design systems and processes to overcome that very few and part of assault. although the research may be unsettling, it is what we do next that matters most but racial bias is an epidemic in

law enforcement anymore than it is academic in academia or the arts. in fact i believe law-enforcement overwhelmingly attracts people who want to do good for a living, people who risk their lives because they want to help other people. they don't sign of to the cops in new york or chicago or l.a. to help white people, black people spanish people or asian people, they sign up because they want to help all people. and they do some of the hardest most dangerous policing to protect communities of color. but that leads me to my third hard truth, something happens to people in law enforcement. many of us develop different flavors of cynicism that we work hard to resist because they can be lazy mental shortcuts. for example criminal suspects routinely lie about their guilt and nearly everybody thought we'd charge is guilty. that makes it easy for some folks in law enforcement to

assume that everybody is lying and no suspect regardless of their race could be innocent. easy, but wrong. likewise police officers on patrol in our nation's cities often working environments where acutely disproportionate percentage of street crime is committed by young men of color. something happens to people of goodwill working in that environment. after years of police work officers often can't help but be influenced by the cynicism they feel. and mental shortcut becomes almost irresistible and maybe even rational by some lights. tweet young black men on one side of the street look like so many others that officer has locked up. to white men on the other side of the street even in the same clothes do not. the officer does not make the same association about the two white guys weather that officer is white or black and that drives different behavior. the officer turns toward one

side of the street and not the other. we need to come to grips with the faxes this behavior complicates the relationship between the police and the communities they serve. why has that officer like his colleagues locked up so many young men of color? why does he have that life shaping experience? is it because he is a racist? why are so many black men in jail? is it because cops, prosecutors, judges and juries are racist? because they're turning a blind eye to white robbers and drug dealers? the answer is a hard truth. i don't think so. if it were so, that would be easier to address. we would just need to change the way we hire, train and measure law-enforcement and that would substantially fix it. we would then go get the white criminals we have been ignoring, but the truth is much harder than that. the truth is what really needs fixing is something only a few

like president obama are willing to speak about perhaps because it is so daunting task. my brother's keeper initiative, my president is addressing the disproportionate challenges faced by young men of color. for instance data shows that the percentage of young men not working or not enrolled in school is nearly twice as high for blacks as it is for whites. this initiative and others like it is about doing artwork to grow drug-resistant and violence resistant kids especially in communities of color so they never become part of the officer's life experience. so many young men of become part of that officer's life experience because so many minority families and communities are struggling. so many graves in environments without adequate education and decent employment, they lack all sorts of opportunities most of us take for granted. a tragedy of american life one that most citizens are able to

drive around because it doesn't touch them is young people in those neighborhoods too often inherited a legacy of crime in prison and with that inheritance they become part of a police officer's life and shaped the way that officer whether white or black sees the world. changing that legacy is a challenge so enormous and so complicated that it is unfortunately easier to talk only about the cops and that is not fair. let me be transparent about my affection for cops. when you dial 911, whether you are white or black, the cops come and they come quickly and they come quickly whether they are white or blackfish. that is what cops do ended in addition to all of the as the trees can difficult and hard and frightening things that they'd do they respond to homes in the middle of the night where a drunken father will and a gun is threatening his wife and children, they found out the back stairs of the apartment

building not knowing whether the guy behind the door they are about to enter our armed or height or both. i come from a law enforcement family. my grandfather was a police officer. he is one of my heroes. i have a picture of him on my wall in my office at the fbi reminding me of the legacy that i have inherited and must honor. he was a child of immigrants. when he was in the sixth grade his father was killed in an industrial accident in new york so he had dropped out of school to support his mom and younger siblings. he could never afford to return to school but when he was old enough he joined the yonkers new york police department. over the next 40 years he propose to leave that department. he was the tall strong silent type quiet and dignified and passionate about the rule of law. bootleggers were running beer through fire hoses between the bronx and the yonkers.

he enjoyed a good beer now and then but he ordered his men to cut those hoses with fire axes and then he needed a protective detail because certain people were a angry and shocked that someone in law enforcement would do that but that is what we want as citizens, that is what we expect. i keep a picture of him on my wall in my office his pride in the integrity of his work. law-enforcement ranks are filled with people like my grandfather. but to be clear also i am from a law enforcement family and spent much of my career in law enforcement i am not looking to let law-enforcement off the hook. those of us in law enforcement must redouble our efforts to resist bias and prejudice, we must better understand the people we serve and protect, by trying to know deep in our gut what it feels like to be a law-abiding young black man walking down the street and

encountering law-enforcement, we must understand how that young man may see us. we must resist the lazy shortcuts of cynicism and approached him with respect and decency. we must work in the words of new york city police commissioner bill bratton to release each other. the reason we struggle destination is because we have come to see only what we represent at face value in set of who we are. we simply must see the people we serve, but the seeing needs to flow in both directions. citizens also need to really see the men and women of law enforcement, they need to see what the police see through their windshields and as they walk down the street, they need to see the risks and dangers of law-enforcement encountered on any typical late night shift. they need to understand the difficult and frightening work they do to keep us safe. and they need to give them the respect and space that they need

to do their job well and properly. if they take the time to do that, what they will seek are officers who are human, who are overwhelmingly doing the right thing for the right reasons and too often operating in communities and facing challenges most of us choose to drive around. one of the hardest things i do as fbi director is called the chiefs and sheriffs of departments around the nation when officers have been killed in a line of duty. i called to express my sorrow and offer the fbi's held. officers like two than the the's finest oregon down by a madman who fought his ambush would avenge the deaths of michael brown and eric garner. i make far too many calls and there are far too many names of fallen officers on the national law enforcement officers memorial and far too many names

etched there each year. face wore the same goes all law enforcement do and answered the call to serve the people all the people. like all good police officers they move toward danger without regard for the politics or passions or race of those who needed their help, knowing the risks inherent in their work. they were minority police officers killed while standing watch in a minority neighborhoods in brooklyn. a neighborhood that they and their fellow officers rescued from the grip of violent crime. for a couple decades it was shorthand for chaos and disorder in which good people had no freedom to walk or shop or play or just sit on the front steps and talk. was too dangerous, but no more. thanks to the work of those who chose lives of service and danger to help others but despite that sacrifice that selfless service these two

officers and countless others like the around the country in some american communities people view the police not as allies that as antagonistic. they think of them as someone not to be treated with gratitude and respect but someone worthy of suspicion and distrust. we simply must find a way to see each other more clearly. and part of that has to involve collecting better information about violent encounters between police and citizens. not long after the riots broke out and ferguson last summer i asked my staff to tell me how many people shot by police were african-american in this country? want to see trends i want to see information. they couldn't give it to me. wasn't their fault. demographic data regarding officer involved shootings is not consistent reported to us through our uniform crime reporting program because reporting is voluntary our data

is incomplete and unreliable. i recently listened to a thoughtful big city chief expresses frustration with that lack of reliable data. he said he didn't know whether the ferguson police shot one person a week, one a year or one a century and in the absence of good data, quote all we get our ideological thunderbolts. what we need our ideological agnostics who use information to solve problems. he is right. the first step to understanding what is really going on in our communities and in our country is to gather more and better data related to those we arrest, those we confront for breaking the law and jeopardize and public safety and those who confront us. the data seems like a board word but without it we cannot understand our world and make it better. how can we address concerns about use of force? how can we address concerns about officer involved shootings if we do not have a reliable

grass on the demographic and circumstances of those incidents. we simply must improve the way we collect and analyze data to see the true nature of what is happening in our communities. the fbi track and publishedes and number of justifiable homicides reported by police departments began, reporting by police departments is voluntary. not all departments participate. that means we cannot fool the track the incidents in which force is used by police force against police including not fatal encounters that are not supported at all, without complete and accurate data we are gripped by ideological thunderbolts and that helps spark unrest and distrust and does not help us get better. because we must get better i intend for the fbi to be the leader in urging departments around this country to give us the facts we need for informed discussion of fact all of us need to help us make sound

policy and sound decisions with that information. america isn't easy. america takes work. today february 12th is abraham lincoln's birthday. he spoke at gettysburg about a new birth of freedom because we spent the first we fourscore and 7 years of our history with fellow americans held as slaves, president healy, his siblings among them. as a nation we have spent the 150 years since lincoln spoke making great progress but along the way treating a whole lot of people of color poorly and law-enforcement was often part of that poor treatment. that is our inheritance as law enforcement and it is not all in the distant past. we must account for that inheritance and we, especially those of us who enjoy the privilege of being the majority must confront the biases that are an inescapable part of the

human condition. we must speak the truth about our shortcomings as law-enforcement and fight to get better. but as a country we must also speak the truth to ourselves. law enforcement is not the root cause of the problems in our hardest-hit neighborhoods. police officers, people of enormous courage and integrity are in those neighborhoods risking their lives to protect folks from offenders to our product of problems that will not be solved by body cameras. we simply must speak to each other honestly about all these hard truths. in the words of dr. king that we must learn to live together as brothers, or we will perish together as fools. we all have hard work to do. challenging work and it will take time. we all need to talk and we all need to listen, not just about the easy things but hard things

too. relationships are hard, relationships require work. so let's begin that work. it is time to start seeing one another for who and what we really are. peace, security and understanding are worth that effort. thank you for listening to me today. [applause] >> i thank the director for these important remarks and let you know that he hasn't time to answer some questions. we ask people to come to the mic and form their question, when you do that as know your name and your affiliation and we appreciate given the importance of the topic of people have questions, focus them on the issue is the director has raised here today.

with that the microphone is open if anybody wants to come up, i will -- i see somebody coming up. don't be shy. >> good morning. i am a junior gun major, spanish minor and i am wondering what has been your most disappointing moment as fbi director and how did you deal with that and on the flip side what has been your proudest moment as director and how has that impacted you going forward? >> i will take it in reverse order. my proudest moment as fbi director, something i said throughout the fbi is related to the topic we are talking about here today. i sent dozens of agents wearing raid jackets to ferguson and

they knocked on hundreds of boards and every door opened and everybody spoke to was whether they're white or black a young or old, male or female. i think because they saw the fbi the orange/yellow fbi and i speak about this at graduations of agents, that is a priceless gift, to be believed, to be seen as somebody who cares about the facts and getting it right. we have to protect that gift. that was my proudest moment in my 18 months so far. most difficult, there have and a lot of them that relate to other subjects, terrorism and loss of innocent life deeply involved in our hostages overseas, trying to to get them home. that has been heartbreaking to me. one of the reasons i am giving this speech is one of my other disappointments has been i felt like we have not -- i felt like

we haven't had a healthy dialogue and i don't want to see these important issues drift away. we have a tendency to move onto other things as busy people but these issues especially about race and law-enforcement have always been with us and we can't let it drift away and talk about it another day. one of my disappointment has been i have seen dialogue i didn't think was balanced and also start to drift away and i'm determined not to let that happen and to try to encourage good people who will see the world differently than i do to talk about it. >> i am in the school foreign service and i would like to know besides improvement in the manner in which police incidents are reported what other major infrastructure changes would you like to see within the justice

system of america? >> that is a big one. there are a lot of things being talked about. i mentioned by the cameras. that is an important discussion. i think the most important thing is -- there's a risk that this will sound vague but it is critical. i think it is hard to hate pop close. the police in our country need to get out of their cars, literally and figuratively and get to know the people they serve and people in the communities need to know them. one thing we experience with the economic challenges we have had over the last 7 or 8 years is police department lost funding for all kinds of things that used to allow that things tappan. police athletic league's, running the fbi citizens academies where we invite citizens to learn about us, police departments use to have those kinds of things, they have started to be eliminated and drift away because of lack of funding. that seems like that vague thing but that is critical to people's

trust in the justice system and if we neglect it, we can have all the rules and all the technology in the world but underneath will be a lack of trust and a misunderstanding that will be corrosive no matter how good our process and technology is. that is the way i think about that. >> i am a sophomore in the college. if i understand you i think what i understood is used said the disparate treatment of blacks and whites by law enforcement can often be traced to different situations facing black and white communities so i was wondering how you would explain the disparate proportion of drug arrests despite almost equal levels of drug use in the communities. >> that is a hard question. the best answer i can offer is i don't know enough about the data on drug use the arrests but i

know a lot about the drug dealing arrests so i think in the communities where police are patrolling especially where we are focusing on our artist hit communities where the dealers overwhelmingly turned out to the people of color, not just black folks but hispanic folks as well are locked up a lot for drug dealing. a lot of overwhelmingly users of drugs are caucasian so the we don't talk about it enough, you alluded to it. i have often thought just focusing on the dealing is like dealing with a hole in your boat just by building all the time you got to deal with the demand side of it which is overwhelmingly evan bayh employed people from the suburbs and caucasian, another hard truth people don't talk about a lot. >> have a freshman in college at georgetown and my question is you mentioned earlier that the two assassinated officers in the nypd were both minorities working in a predominantly minority neighborhoods. do you think it is legitimate

goal for american law enforcement to try to ensure that racial diversity of their police force working in certain neighborhoods are approximately equal to the proportions of racial groups in the neighborhoods they are working in? >> yes. i don't think it is just a goal. there is a word more important than goal. it is an imperative for all of us in law enforcement to try to reflect the communities we serve. big challenge for the fbi. fbi is overwhelmingly white and male. i happen to be a white male but the first e-mail i sent my work force was about this topic. it is a matter of morality, doing what is right and effectiveness. if you are not sold on the morality of it the effectiveness is critical. we can't understand the communities we serve, we can't understand the perspectives of the people we serve if we are all 6 foot 8 inch tall white guys who are slightly awkward

and grew up in the new york area. we just can't and sell it is an imperative and we have a crisis in a lot of parts of law enforcement. the nypd has and spectacular job. other departments less so. my own organization struggles with that so the answer is yes. sorry for the long answer. >> i am in continuing studies and my question is the problem with a lot of ferguson and some of the other incidents that have happened, also stems, can also be as much to blame on the culture and the communities the law enforcement environment the blame is equally because both have their own preconceived attitudes one community's attitude towards law enforcement and law enforcement's attitude toward

the community it would seem the logical step would be to incorporate the two, so what is the fbi doing to higher or incorporate young black men and women or young men and women of different backgrounds in to the agency, in to the department of justice as a whole because i think if we lack young black men, sees a number of black cops everywhere or number of black fbi agents and officials will going to be more receptive and more trusting and not to say affirmative-action is needed but how are you addressing being able to hire people of more diverse backgrounds because right now standards are nearly unattainable for someone who grew up from nothing. >> great question. i don't think the standards are

unattainable. i think there are lots of great agents of color women who could come work that the fbi, would love working at the fbi. i just got to get the interested in it. i could talk all day about this but i will try to be very short. one of my challenges, average age of entry is 29. we are going to give these folks great power, we want adults who have developed judgment through experience and so i don't know what your plans are after graduation but my challenge is if you are as good as you probably are because you go to school year, coca-cola will ask for you, appleby after you exxon mobile will be after you answer all kinds of dough at you and when you're 29 you will be thinking not so much, go work for the government so i am trying to figure out how to get people in earlier sell i put a tremendous amount of effort in my 18 months into hiring right out of college because if i can get you right out of georgetown

you will find out how amazing it is to do good for a living in a different role in a support role, intelligence analysts role and in your dirksen senate office building 0s you will be so in love with this work that you will stay with us and become a special agent. that appeals to me as a strategy to deal with this but a big part of it is getting people to know us. we are devoting tremendous resources going out to campuses historically black colleges, get to know us, what kind of people we are what we care about. it is hard to hate up close, hard to misunderstand up close. if you see our work and the things we care about, the kind of people we are and if i get my hands on you before the private sector put the handcuffs on you. i have to change the numbers. we will see you don't know when you will graduate but see you in a little while. thank you. >> my name is jason smith, for

spears master candidate in the security studies program. you mentioned before they often wait off after a while. in your interactions with local police departments or any federal level of police or law enforcement, how do you think these issues can be formally institutionalized into the act will department and at the local law enforcement levels on passing issues? >> the answer is we have to make sure that we in law enforcement take this conversation and push it to our police leaders, all law enforcement leaders and encourage and push and prod and beg them to continue the conversation in their communities. all politics is local, all relationships are local. one of the challenges we face is 18,000 police organizations in the big cities, lots of little jurisdictions. ferguson is a little tiny jurisdictions so it is not just

about reacheding big city chiefs to are very thoughtful bunch in my experience, is about pushing the conversation beyond that to the hundreds of others that are smaller. one thing i did is talk to all of my -- fbi in every community in the country 500 offices of i have all my field commanders take my speech and we have citizens academies, loss of relationships with local authorities. engage them. i am not saying they should think of the the way i do but take this into the community and see if we in the fbi can't help foster this conversation. the good news is the chiefs, i talked to a lot of big city she's, they are grateful for the conversation. they don't want to see a drift off because they know we have to talk about it at some point. it won't go away by virtue of us moving on to something else so that is what we are trying to do. thank you. >> good morning. i am a junior at the school studying history. and my question is related to history and the question of law

enforcement. martin luther king said that an unjust law is the human lot that is not tendered to me turn or natural law. it seems to me in our discussion of law-enforcement and just as the conversation is mainly focused on the question of will of law but what discussions of rule of law and enforcing rule of law can sometimes miss is at times the laws law enforcement are commanded to enforce are in fact and just. we seen that in our and nation's history. my question is what is the role of the fbi and law-enforcement in general when they are commanded or ordered to enforce laws that are in fact and just? >> very thoughtful question. if we believe than to be unjust our obligation is to raise our hand and speak out, to raise it within the justice department, to raise it to the attorney general, to raise it with those who make the laws that we enforce.

i don't think our job, one thing i am very proud of the fbi today is full of people who care about doing the right thing, not just doing this thing if that makes her sense. our obligation is to try to understand, this is why is critical to understand the people we are staring and protecting and locking up, are we doing something that seems off-track to assenting consistent with our notions of what the right thing is? we have got to raise our hands and got to shout about that. >> my name is point, a i am a freshman in the college and you mention the lives of the two fallen officers in new york and i was wondering what you think we can do to restore the relationship between our criminal justice system and the citizens they served not only to restore the faith in the system but also to preserve the safety of those officers? >> the critical part of it is

what i emphasized, phrasing that took from bill brennan, the notion that we need to see each other. we in law enforcement have to have an effort to have people understand us and the kind of people we are. we are flawed because we're human beings. who we are in the main people need to see that and as i said, that is the block by block precinct by precinct local efforts, in finding people in. i mentioned getting out of your car is literally and figuratively, inflight people in, have and see us and understand us especially in the hardest-hit neighborhoods. those police officers are there to protect a great historical community and i think it is critical that we continue to see each other and close. there are lots of smaller things that frankly the most important thing to me is do we know the people we serve and do they know us? empathy is often very short supply in human experience.

that is why i mention the of the key to understand what that young black man walking home from a library may be thinking when we encounter him. that is critical for us. it is important for him to think about how we see the world and why we are in the neighborhood patrol in. i worry that sounds they and mushy but that actually is i think the answer. more so than fixes to policy or technology. >> my name is thomas and imus spanish student a freshman. i ask a two part question the first about the trend in the military -- miller authorization of police. coming from europe seeing police with handguns or machine guns, something seems strange. the second thing is whether you think prisons or jails are accomplishing the role of not only putting away criminals but also helping them to come out and be able to live in society? >> the second one is easy to

answer, no. lots of good people, one of the things that makes sense, right and left in america, understanding we have to do a better job the equipping people off every arrest, every conviction is the failure of us as a community helping that person come out to be productive. we have not done a good enough job at that. the militarization one is harder. here is the way i think about it. it is not about the stuff. the stuff is neutral. shield, body armor, armored vehicle, automatic weapon. we in law enforcement need that stuff in this country unfortunately. we often faced adversaries barricaded in a location who are firing high-powered weapons, trying to kill lot of innocent people so i expect in every garage, every fbi office around the country there will be an armored vehicle automatic

weapons ballistic plating, that won't stop the high-powered rounds. the issue is how do we use that stuff? how do we train people to use that stuff? do we use that stuff to confront people who are protesting when they are concerned about something in the community? do we use a sniper rifle to sneak closer to a crowd? that is where it breaks down. i said this to chiefs and sheriffs all over the country, i have been all over the country and visited 56 field offices and set to every chief it is about the training and discipline and judgment about how we use it. it is not the stuff. that is how i think about it. >> good morning, my name is jamie scott, a and a staff director and i appreciated your discussion for the need for good data and i am curious to hear your thoughts on why you think

local police departments and to compel or mandates or encourage department to provide data. >> i don't know the reasons why. i suspect among them especially for smaller departments in seems a lot of work, filling out a federal form we developed a system called the national incident based reporting system which is designed to collect rich data about encounters between police and citizens. and anybody in which our great country is structured, which all of you study. i have a bully pulpit in a way to encourage departments to use the system to collect the data. i could go on google and figure out how many people does the cdc

count to emergency rooms, and the absolute number on a particular amazon is ridiculous how many people are shot by police in the country. i take the notion that it is ridiculous to the men and women in uniform around the country. we have got to collect it. the next step would be legislature getting involved to compel it. the persuasive arguments -- thank you. >> good morning, graduate of 2004. having served in the army in combat and certainly learning through the doctorate program and homeland security, what we really need the discussion to be

about community oriented policing where you get out there and you know the community and spent several years building that rapport and trusts. and talking about how anonymous tips when they came in there was an immediate respect by the community that they are there to help us. the state and local sheriffs and police department is not to buy a high-tech military stick equipment but new patrol cars, training to build confidence and not to be afraid established in stability but the linchpin is getting the stats and algorithms and data to members of congress. they believe the funding will be necessary to get the job done. the department of justice and

major organizations have a lot more i guess clout in getting that money faster than local or state level folks. what would you hope from a community member that we call our mayors, state legislators, and say don't forget policeing. >> thanks for that. big part of it is leaders of our towns and cities understanding in many places they are starving the police departments, making it really hard for them to follow my advice to get out of their cars and get to know people. take the city of detroit. i met with a detective there who was working to reduce violent crime and he was explaining not long ago there were 5,000 police officers, today there are 2,000. how do you patrol the city of that size with less than half of the officers used on hand, how do you get out of your car and walk around and see people when you are covering an area that is

enormous? cities across the country cut funding for police departments to do things that seem small but are quite like police athletic league's citizens academies. those things i may be less high-profile but those are investments in the future. what we are doing now in cities around the country is like homeowners thinking, i will save money but i won't investing repairing the roof. you are going to be sorry. you must invest in that kind of maintenance of the relationship with the community and support community policing which requires resources. >> we have time for one last question. >> i am a sophomore in the college. i have a quick question on how to prompt a national dialogue with different perspectives. a lot of people see the value in seeing prospective from law enforcement and race.

however lot of the dialogue is prompted through polarizing from the left and right so how do you see sort of the tone changing nationally, people seeing both sides conlan and what leaders can do to change this perspective? >> that is a big hard question. probably not qualified to answer but i will take a shot anyway since i am sitting here with a microphone. i think we own the media outlets. they're not creating us, they are creating them. and starts with all of us saying i am going to try to imagine how others see the world, the essential challenge of human existence. i can only experience the world through me but i must work to see the world through you ended fall of us start to feel that way, we and the media outlets they don't own us. i worry can be a cop out to say

we are polarized because of the media, no the media is fractured because of us, we are responsible for that. will we change that interact with each other. >> i think the director for coming here and hosting us on this important topic. it is clearly something that reflects our very values as a country and shapes our future and something to come to grips with in law enforcement and as a community at large. we appreciate you adding to this conversation. georgetown is committed to continuing that dialogue for those who are interested in participating in additional events tomorrow at 12:45, there is going to be a lunch sponsored by the center for social justice, the office of student affairs and mission ministry to continue this conversation on georgetown's campus but we appreciate you and other imaging, mr. director and

talking to us today. [applause] >> featured programs for this president's day weekend, on booktv saturday morning at 9:00, live coverage of the savannah book festival with nonfiction authors and books like the disappearance of michael rockefeller, a british company of elephants during world war ii and four win in spies during the civil war and sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards senior adviser for president obama david axelrod on his 40 years in politics and on american history tv, saturday morning beginning at 8:30 the 100th anniversary of the release

of the film the birth of the nation starting with an interview of author declare, the showing of the entire 1915 film followed by a live call-in program with civil war historian harry jones and dr. declare and sunday at 8:00 on the presidency george washington portraits focusing on how artists captured the spirit of the first president and what we can learn through their paintings. find out complete television schedule at c-span.org and what you think about the programs you're watching. 202-646-3600 e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet at c-span has tag comments. join the conversation like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> this sunday on q&a film maker, says alan harris exports how african-americans have been portrayed in photographic images from the time of slavery through

today. >> debra willis groundbreaking book about black photographers and also very much aware there is this other narrative that was going on as well in which black people were constructed post slavery and before the end of slavery as something other dan human. it was part of the marketing of photographs and memorabilia and now would be considered passe but still kind of haunting us in terms of the way in which we might see ourselves, the way in which we might see others. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span q&a. c-span2 providing live coverage of the u.s. senate floor proceedings and keep public policy events and every weekend booktv for 15 years the only television network devoted to

nonfiction books and authors. c-span2 created by the cable-tv industry and brought to you as a public service by your local cable satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. ..

again, waiting for the start of the house armed services committee meeting on the threat of isis. should get underway in a moment as soon as the ranking member of rights. the house is dabbling in at this hour to complete work on a small business tax credit bill the administration opposes. if you would like coverage of the house on c-span. also on c-span2, ambassador john bolton will talk about national security issues that congress should address and that will be up 12:25 eastern. president obama president obama addresses the cyber security summit. his remarks will also be live on c-span2 at 2:20 eastern.

[inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order. on wednesday the president submitted to congress his proposal for authorization to use military force against isis. although the order to combat operations against isis take place in iraq since last august and into syria since last september, only now has he sought congressional authorization required by the constitution. despite the airstrikes, press accounts indicate isis expanded its territory that it controls in syria. the world sees its barbarism that seems to have no limits. in the meantime, the united states has suffered a setback in yemen. we've abandoned our embassy there another place the president once held out as a model against his counterterrorism approach. now we are in a weaker position

to prevent attacks by the organization that has posed the most serious threats to our homeland in recent years to be elsewhere, they are killing thousands and steadily advancing in nigeria libya has become a breeding ground for terrorist groups aqim still in several african countries and there is concern al qaeda and afghan pakistan region is becoming reinvigorated as u.s. troop levels are reduced. congress will consider the proposal in the context of this wide fight against islamic terrorists. the purpose of today's hearing is to evaluate how that broad struggle is going. among the questions i have are what are the trends we see with islamist terrorists come is there a fuel growing or diminishing around the world is the threat to the united states becoming more or less serious. many in congress want reassurance is the president has a strategy to succeed against the threat and that he is personally committed to

persevere until we are successful. it's clear that before we are successful, we've got to understand the threat, where we are and where we are headed. that's the purpose of today's hearing. mr. smith. >> thank you. i think the chair for this important topic. i think it is the largest national security threats that we face as a country. i know all three of our panelists have a lot of knowledge on the issue and it will be helpful for the committee to hear from them and engage in questions and answers to try to confront this threat and part of the problem on the threat is that it is not easy to define or put a strategy around because he really is a broad ideology that has many different components. post post-9/11, we saw al qaeda as a terrorist group with a leadership plotting and planning attacks against us and i think that we responded accordingly to try to defeat that organization to try to defeat the network and

did a reasonably effective job at it in afghanistan and pakistan as we prevented that growth for the further attacks against us. that's the positive. the ideology itself has been plasticized -- metastasized in a lot of different places. and at the root cause is a lack of solid governance lack of solid economic opportunity in the middle east, north africa and much of the arab muslim world. they have an exploded youth population that has nothing to do. no jobs and no prospects. so if they come along and say i have the answer for you it has plenty of willing recruits and meanwhile they don't have much in the example of the good government anywhere that they could look to and work with. so it's going to be very difficult to contain this as the

chair mainly about the challenges with isis in iraq and syria, the difficulty in libya but overall we need a long-term strategy and one of the things that has hampered us is that we have to be able to confidently say either that we are winning or we are going to win and here's how. i honestly think this is a long-term ideological struggle not something we can say we are determined to defeat so let's just suck it up and three or four years from now it will be done. it took 75 years to defeat communism. we have to figure out how to have a long-term strategy to deal with this ideology. that doesn't mean in the short term the ideology runs rampant. a huge piece of the strategy is containing the threat figuring out how to protect our interest from violence and figuring out how to begin to roll back these

groups and roll back the advance in their ideology. but it is an issue that the guy is an easy answer. so, what we hope to hear today are some ideas on how we can proceed and move forward, mindful of the fact that it is a very large problem that's going to take a long time to deal with. the final point i will make that is hampering us it isn't something the u.s. or western world can take care of. the muslim world doesn't want the united states to show up and tell it what it ought to do. this is true and even the moderate muslims we look to work with. we have to figure out how we can be helpful to support those moderate voices so that they can triumph, so that they can defeat these extremist ideologies. it cannot be western driven by the very definition of the way us folks look at the world. so, we can help but if we hope to much we wind up hurting the overall effort. i think that is the lesson we

learned in iraq and afghanistan. with that i look forward to the testimony and appreciate the chair and holding the hearing. >> i thank the gentleman. we are supposed to have votes on the floor roughly around 10:40 content:45. i'm going to try to be fairly strict with the time limit so we can move along smartly. i ask unanimous consent the full written statement of all of our witnesses be made part of the record. without objection, so ordered. let me thank the witnesses for being here. very pleased to see retired lieutenant general michael flynn of the central intelligence agency. mr. william braniff executive director national consortium for the study of terrorism and responses at the university of maryland, and doctor marc lynch with the george washington university. all of these gentlemen have done very serious, helpful work for

the committee and the country on this topic of terrorism and we are grateful to have you with us today. or full written statement will be made part of the record. if you like to summarize at this point and get to questions we would appreciate it. general flynn. >> chairman mac thornberry, drinking member smith, members of the committee it's an honor to be here today. i appreciate the invitation. you've asked me to comment on the state of islamic extremism. today, i have the unhappy task informing you that according to every metric of significance islamic extremism has grown over the last year whether it be the scale and scope of isis and its associated movements the number of violent islamist groups, the territory the the group's control, the number of terrorist attacks peace groups perpetrate some of the massive numbers and suffering of refugees and displaced persons due to these islamist groups -- that approximately 15 million people -- the amount of kidnapping and

rape of women and children by these groups can limit the number of casualties they inflict with a broad expansion and use of the internet, which is serious, or just their sheer barbarism that we've witnessed. i can draw no other conclusion than to say the threat of extremist islamism has reached an unacceptable level and it's growing. we are at war with violent extremist islamists and we must accept and face this reality. this enemy has an undrained unshakable view how the world should be ordered and they believe that violence is a legitimate means of bringing about this ideal state. the violent islamist is serious doubt, committed and dangerous. his ideology justifies the most heinous inhumane actions imaginable and he will not be reasoned with nor will he relented. this enemy must be opposed they must be killed they must be destroyed and the associated extremist form of the islamic ideology must be defeated wherever it rears its ugly head.

there are some that counsel patients are giving violent islamists are not an accidental threat and can be managed as criminals. i'd respectfully and strongly disagreed. i've been in the theaters of the war in iraq and afghanistan for many years, face to faced the enemy of close and personal and i have seen firsthand the unrestrained cruelty of this enemy. they may be animated by the medieval ideology that they are thoroughly modern in their capacity to kill and maim as well as precisely and very slightly message their ideas, intentions and actions via the internet. in fact they are increasingly capable of threatening the nation's interest and those of our allies. furthermore it would be foolish for us to wait until our enemies pose an accidental threat before taking decisive action. doing so would only increase the cost of blood and treasure, leader for what we know must be done now. our violent and extremely

radical islamist enemies must be stopped. to that end, i offer the following three strategic objectives. first, we have to energize every element of national power, similar to the effort during world war ii, were during the cold war to effectively resource will likely be a multi-generational struggle. there is no cheap way to win this fight. second, we must engage the violent islamist wherever they are in the drive them from their safe havens and kill them. there can be no quarter and no accommodation from this vicious group of terrorists. any nationstate that offers a safe haven to the enemies must be given one choice, to eliminate them or be prepared for those contributing partners involved in this endeavor to do so. we do not -- we do need we do need to recognize that there are nations that lack the capability to defeat this threat and will likely require help to do so in spite of their own internationally recognized boundaries.

we must be prepared to assist those nations. third, we must decisively confront the state and nonstate supporters and enablers of the violent islamist ideology and compel them to end their support to our enemies would be prepared to remove their capacity to do so. many of these are currently considered partners of the united states. this must change. if our so-called partners do not act in accordance internationally accepted norms and behaviors or international law, the united states must be prepared to cut off were severely curtail economic and military and diplomatic ties. we cannot be seen as being hypocritical to those we are partnering with to defeat radical islam. finally, in pursuit of these objectives i fully support congress's constitutional role in providing an authorization for the use of military force. this authorization should be broad and agile that unconstrained by unnecessary restrictions restrictions for

today cause not only frustration and our in our military, our intelligence and diplomatic immunities but also significantly slow down the decision-making process for numerous leading opportunities. it is important however to realize that such a novelization is neither a comprehensive strategy or a war winning one. if there is not a clear coherent and comprehensive strategy forthcoming from the administration there should be no authorization. with that mr. chairman, i'm happy to take your questions. >> thank you general. mr. braniff. >> chairman thornberry chi ranking members to smith thank you for inviting us today. in 2013, over 22,000 people were killed and nearly 8,500 terrorist attacks. when they release the full terrorism database for 2014 we anticipate it will include over 15,000 terrorist attacks.

our preliminary data for 2015 for just seven of the ten most lethal groups in 2014 were violent jihad is to groups and speedy levin among them conducted more than any other organization. the trend line over is driven by two factors. first the proliferation to the group associated with al qaeda and hotspots around the world and second the rise of isil and the strategy of escalation through the sectarian violence. what we have therefore therefore conveys the makings, is the makings of a global competition involving the most violent terrorist organizations in the world. this is even more troubling when one considers that both the theoretical and empirical work in the terrorism studies field suggest competition among the groups is a most important predictor of increasingly saudi overtime. to better understand the competition and implementations i would like to contrast the operations and strategies of al qaeda in the movement or aqim.

al qaeda is leading an attrition against the west specifically the united states. if they are able to attribute the american economic military or political will to remain engaged in the muslim world, the local jihad is can overpower the regime and establish what they would consider to be the proper theocracy. to wage the war of attrition al qaeda send operatives into the conflict zones across the world to reorient the violence of the organizations and individuals, refocusing the enemy targets like western embassies were the tourist destinations. al qaeda has been mass casualty attacks against heavy-handed military responses from western governments that seemingly evidence the war on islam and al qaeda for treasonous propaganda thereby polarizing the muslim and non-muslim world and enabling the jihad is to mobilize for the civilizational confidence. isil isn't waging the war of attrition but one of escalation. instead of inviting muslim persons western violence that is

benefiting from the resource is already being mobilized by the sectarian polarization taking place in iraq and cvi cbi and beyond, which actively seeks. instead of the far enemy caused the 65 operations focused on attacking the competitors in their midst that do not submit to their ideological organizational primacy and seizing the resources necessary to build the divisions in the caliphate. given the competition, there are several implications for u.s. policy and regional security. the first was al qaeda or the foreign enemy strategy relying on the polarizing the mobilizing of the masses. they are already elevating the level of the sectarian tension in the post-arab world that continued presence of the regime in serious herbs is a more salient cry for isil danforth aqim and the broad anti-assad sentiments in the country help to dampen the responses to put the groups.

the tensions remain high, isil and the jihad groups will foster in attention and veterans will travel to the new front outside of iraq and syria bringing the strategy and sectarianism with them. in a worst-case scenario, the contagion effect runs the risk of fighting a sectarian civil war in the muslim world. relegating the west to the role of the observer, poorly positioned to do meaningful action to protect themselves or others. in addition, every new isil front has a new mobilization pathway for the terrorist organizations seeking to radicalize before in fighters. both isil and aqim conduct attacks as part of the competition. attacks against the west can be used as a form of deterrence making the countries think twice delete code twice for the large-scale military interventions in iraq and syria. we cannot be fooled into thinking that al qaeda's focus

on the caliphate prevents them from seeking the capability to conduct attacks against the homeland. al qaeda's associated movement, began tagging a stick rise to prominence created a crisis of legitimacy and to use the enemy attacks to keep in the spotlight. furthermore, if isil overstepped its bounds as we have seen with respect to the murder of the jordanian pilot, al qaeda and its movement might wind up looking more legitimate and mainstream by comparison as long as they remain focused on the true enemies of islam in the west. we cannot therefore take pressure off of aqim. to conclude we are seeing an escalating competition among the violent sunni extremist groups at the time sectarian tensions are high and many governments full of end of legitimacy is weak. it is essential any strategy paradise is working with the nations and communities to marginalize the violent extremists. to do this, the u.s. must find a way to ease the sectarian tensions and earn the trust of the partners allowing them to

focus their attention on marginalizing the groups like isil and aqim. thank you. >> thank you. doctor lynch. i would like to thank the committee. it's an honor to be on the panel and have a chance to speak with you. as you heard from my colleagues, isil poses a serious threat to american interests, the people of the region, partners in the region and of course it is extremely important not to underestimate the nature of the threat or to misunderstand the nature of the threat. i think it's important however not to exaggerate its novelty or perhaps the magnitude of the threat. these are not a superhuman though with unprecedented abilities to form states or to seize territory or inspire. the world history is full of insurgencies that have captured territory and sought to governance by extracting resources from the local population, the world history is

full of insurgencies that have used graphic violence terrorism to intimidate their enemies and to ensure control of the local populations. we have seen both islamists over the world history. this is a dangerous organization that must be confronted that it's important that we place it in the proper perspective. the most important perspective that we need to keep is to understand the fundamental strategic dilemma that islamist extremist groups based from the beginning whether it is the islamic jihad in egypt or the islam that group in algeria or al qaeda in 2000 or isil today. the fundamental strategic problem is that while they do absolutely have the vision that general flynn described, the characteristic general general flynn describes command of extreme dogmatism the vast majority of the muslims of the world do not agree with them and they have failed every time they've attempted to reach out

and mobilize the world's muslims on their side. the ideology and the strategy of al qaeda and the isil is to create a clash of civilizations to create an on the bridge to divide between the muslims of the world and the west. and what we must keep in mind as we formulate any kind of effective strategy is the way to defeat isil al qaeda and all forms of the extremism is to marginalize and form alliances with the vast majority of the world to reject the barbarism and rejected the extreme ideologies. the face of muslims and the minds of americans and into the face of muslims in the mind of the world should not be baghdad or osama bin laden. it shouldn't be the faceless murderers of the journalists. it should be like the dental student student volunteered for this of volunteer for this eerie and refugees murdered in north

carolina this week. to defeat a isil, america must be seen as their champion, not as their enemy. and if we are able to align ourselves with the aspirations and the hopes of muslims all over the world, then isil can be defeated, and only then. so i do not disagree with general flynn's character is -- characterization. but we need to approach this from the perspective of the need to constantly seek to deflate their pretensions and marginalize them and expose their extremism and i is not only a fuss that of the muslims they seek to recruit to mobilize and ultimately to lead. this was i believe one of the great accomplishments, the great bipartisan accomplishment of both the bush administration after 9/11 and the obama administration. the immediate understanding of the strategic divide and the need to not allow al qaeda after

9/11 to provoke this kind of clash of civilization. president bush, despite some missteps early on i think did a fantastic job trying to reach out to the muslims of the united states and ensure that the divide doesn't open up and i think that is a bipartisan commitment that we should build on today. now, they might appear to statement, i go through in some detail explanations for why isil has emerged in the form that it has today. i won't repeat those here. let me if the bullet points because i think it's important to place this into a specific political context the ranking member smith in his opening statement mentioned the failure of governance and this is important the failure of the air of the uprising is the key part of the merchants of isil in the form that it is today. the enormous number of muslims arabs around the middle east have seen their hopes raised and then crushed. the military in egypt is particularly a defining point in

proving unfortunately tolarge number of people that the peaceful political participation is not an option. if we are going to respond to isil in a way that again i agreed with agree with the general that we must we need to address those underlining causes the underlying causes of despair, alienation, and the absence of alternative paths, which is building a possible tool of the recruit for isil. that includes reversing the sectarian misgovernment of iraq and it includes trying to find some kind of peaceful the escalation of the war in serious and trying to find a way to align the united states forces of moderate and peaceful change. that is no easy task. i have ideas how we might go on doing that but i will stop and welcome everyone's questions. >> thank you and i appreciate the testimony from each of you. i would like to ask a couple brief questions of each of you. general, towards the end of your statement, you make the point

about aumf shouldn't be overly constrained. you have a lot of experience in the east and south asia. the du have an opinion about how difficult it would be for our troops to follow the destruction that says they could not engage in the offensive ground combat operations? we need to be very clear this may come out of an agreement between the legislative and executive branch. when we get our military commanders in mission, we should allow them to execute that mission and not overly constrained them with approved authorities but then having to

come back to the administration for the permission that if we authorize the use of force to do something, with these many times fleeting opportunities that the military forces see and then they have to come back to a bureaucratic process to get permission even though there is an authority given to them we need to review those authorities or change the commanders because apparently we don't trust them to do the job that we have given them to do. so that is a problem today. give the commanders the authority to execute the mission that they have been given. if they are not the right people come up with somebody else and that can do that otherwise allow them to do the things they have been assigned and tasked and are capable of doing in what is currently the aumf that we have. we've become so overly bureaucratic and coming up through the system to get permission to basically do things that the kernels are the

captains at sea are capable of doing. >> mr. braniff, i was struck in your testimony as i read that just in the last 12 months we have seen these terrorist organizations in their attacks trade as i understand one of the things your organization does is keep track of these with objective that metrics. even in the last year we've seen this problem gets dramatically worse. >> mr. chairman, if you compare the most violent terrorist organization to those in 2014 the level of violence from isil boca raton al qaeda in the arabian peninsula having increased from 2013 to 2014 according to the preliminary

data iraq, afghanistan, libya experienced increases in violence in 2013 in the preliminary data from 2014. pakistan is the only sort of effective nation which is seeing a decrease out of the countries associated an active. and the increase over the last 12 months and 12 months before that so the trendline is continuing to rise. the partial explanation is that a lot of the strategy now focuses on trying to build capabilities of the partner nations and that is a slow process and some things may get worse before they get better. that is an opportunistic way of the scenario. these organizations have enjoyed a safe haven in the world and have seized on the less stable government and are exploiting

that. >> doctor lynch i am perplexed by the sentence that you have in a prepared statement that says the u.s. has created an effective strategy responding to isil which has halted its momentum. is that the way that you see the development over the last year or so? >> i actually think the way the administration crafted the strategy as an initial step has been quite effective. they managed to leverage the increased military commitment in iraq into the most important move which was a change in the government of iraq and the removal of the prime minister maliki who come in my opinion carried out a campaign of sectarian misgovernment corruption which had lost and squandered all over the games of the previous years by managing to then get the new iraqi prime minister willing and able to reach out to the iraqi sunnis and then to use air power and limited military support.

..

this notion that it's all falling apart, these guys are as you said superman they will take over everything. i think the analysis of isil was interesting. you watched the news reports and the chairman comment about how they're still spreading that was silly not the case. several months ago i might get my timeline wrong when they were rolling through out of syria, went rolling through iraq, everyone was saying they will be in baghdad next week well, they're not and they're never going to be. they were as you mentioned rolled out of -- have not taken any territory since the initial surge and they have given back

territory. they were also within miles of herb you. my timeline is off here a few much before but with -- irbil. with support for the kurds they were pushed back. we have to keep this in a realistic perspective because i think our greatest strength possibly is what you said. these guys can't govern. they cannot deliver for the muslim population. in mosul right now it's fallen apart. electricity is off pretty much every day. nobody is picking up the garbage. the people there are only staying with fear. i believe isil's momentum has been blunted. it's been blunted in part with help of u.s. but it's been blunted more by their own doing. that's what we have to remember and that's what want to ask general flynn about. i get it is an existential threat. i agree with you and, therefore, we have to amass all of our

forces and figure out how to defeat them. but fundamentally do you disagree with the statement that u.s. military might is simply not in a position to defeat this ideology because of this clash of civilization, because of the way the muslim world looks at washington's aggression, and that the only way we will be successful is if we did moderate muslims to rise up against these folks and support them? do you think it would be good to drop a whole bunch of troops in the middle of series at iraq right now and go get them? are don't you see sort of how that would perhaps play into the hands of isil? if so what would it mean to say we will not all of our military might and go get them? don't we have a gordian knot in that regard? >> so the answer, quick answer is -- that was like a six questions. >> it's early in the morning. >> you typically do that to me. [laughter]

over all the answer is yes. yes don't think, i don't believe what you just said about dropping in hundreds of thousands or u.s. forces, you also said that their next essential threat. i would consider today and say isis is an exceptional threat to this country, the broader ideology. but the broader ideology is, is one that will get inside of her bloodstream, get inside our dna if you will and will permeate over time if we don't do something about it now. it doesn't help us to just kind of went to do something. when i describe and recommended about the combination of the elements of national power you just look at the information campaign that is being waged not by just isis but by al-qaeda writ large, and the waiter able

to do it, the sophistication they're able to do it. at camping alone the military has some old bits and pieces trying to counter that on a tactical battlefield but there has to be a broader imagination that this country working with partners and with some of these so-called moderate nations. and they say that in my statement about we have partners out there and we kind of road be honest with ourselves about some of these partners. we can't continue to fund and to all these kinds of things and that some of these nations at the table with a united states of america when, in fact, we know that they are funding some of these organizations? that's a diplomatic tool that we have to leverage. the our economic tools that we have to leverage. when we say that we are going after terrorist financing and stop this guy, shut down this money being made by the oil refiner, those are tactical things. we have to look at how are we dealing with the moderates and,

frankly, the moderate arab world and these nations where we give economic partnerships and relationships and many to ask them, are they doing everything they can from the role of being moderate. >> let me clarify. i think dr. lynch will agree. i'm not going to say there's a moderate muslim nation. we're talking a more individual people and groups that are in one nation or another. for instance, the biggest success we had in iraq was the anbar awakening. that wasn't a government. that was the sunni tribes rising up and saying, you with their -- >> i agree. it took 50,000 more troops of the. the anbar awakening was incentivized by another 50,000 u.s. american troops on the ground. >> that's a fascinating argument. the anbar awakening was a fools -- a force multiplier of like 2 million. >> i have talked to some of these individuals almost on a daily basis who were involved. i guess what i'm telling you

congressman, is we have to be far more sophisticated and we really have to be come use our imagination to defeat this ideology. tactically we need to go after isis. and, frankly, any of these other safe havens but we have to be more sophisticated in our application of all the instruments of national power to be able to achieve what it is that i believe we need to achieve over a long period of time as you recognize in your opening statement. >> the only thing i will say is i worry a great deal about the notion that people are focused on the u.s. military solution to this problem. and i worry when we talk about the anf has to be opened we can go anywhere any time. and believe me i love the military. you asked them if they can do something. is the answer ever no? you tell me. get five guys. that's just how they're oriented. that's terrific. but that isn't always the right thing, strategy.

unless military might can't do turn it back around. >> there is a benefit to applying pressure on an enemy. you have to not let them have a sound night's sleep anywhere where these vicious individuals exist and groups exist and in the meantime all the other pieces that we have to bring to bear, and that's really my argument. that's one administration to the next because really struggled and maybe came to that realization later on it is not an easy answer. >> there's a lot more tactics and strategy. i yield back. >> thank you. >> general flynn in 2002 the

authorization for use of military force basically said the president is authorized to use the forces of the training as he determines to be necessary and appropriate. why do you think we now have an aumf before us that puts restrictions on it on things that the president claims he can do without an aumf? >> i guess my answer to that would be whatever decision is this body and the executive branch of government, we have to make sure, in one sense we have to play our cards very close to our chest and meaning don't discount any option that the united states of america has by telegraphing is everything okay what those options are or not going to be. we're going to commit troops,

this or that. i just think we have to play a very smart card game with the aumf. i think on this aumf thing though is like i said, that's not a comprehensive strategy. that is a component something that we need. and like i said to chairman, we have to make sure that when we lay this out to our military forces primarily, and to a degree some inside of our intelligence community, that they have the full authority to be able to execute the tasks they are going to be assigned. otherwise, you are tying our hands behind our backs so to speak, and we are slowing the system down through unnecessary bureaucracy. >> thank you. dr. lynch, do you really think these barbarian thugs would make a fellow human being kneeled down before them and cut their heads off really care if they

are marginalized? or do you care do you really think that a group of barbarian thugs who would put a fellow muslim in a cage dousing with gas, second on fire and watch them burn to death really care if they are marginalized. and if you think that, how long do think it will take for this marginalization to take place? >> thank you, congressman. it's a great question and an important one. i don't think they care, but the nature of their knight errant is extreme important. so basically when you are a group like al-qaeda or group like isil, he of two basic strategies you can pursue same as in election. you can play to your base or you can try and reach out to the median voter. what you are saying with isil is very much a basis strategy. they decided that they want to mobilize the already radicalized

him the most dangerous people, the disenfranchised, the ones are already radicalized and want to get them out to syria and iraq and to join. so what we're saying is that at least by press accounts open source accounts, the flow of foreign fighters is increasing. in other words, those brutal videos are actually inspiring that very small number of people in getting them to leave cairo, and come out to isil. at the same time they're alienating the broader mainstream public. the way i would reframe your question is drawing -- trying up to deliver crisp faster than they can get them and extract them and bring them into their fight. and i think that the entity that is still unclear and that's why i'm advocating a strategy in which we try and accelerate their marginalization and alienation from god broader pool of potential recruits. and so no, i don't think they care in the slightest. in fact, many of you remember the old battles between

al-qaeda and iraq. zarqawi's response to criticism that he was alienated muslims by butchering shiites was i don't care, i'm closer to god than you are. i don't care about the mainstream muslim was already abandoned god. he chose a base strategy were as, which is with isil has done as well. so we need to recognize that and then try to make them pay the cost for the basis strategy. >> and that cost is? >> that cost is to continue, i think we started this, i think our arab allies have done this is strong strategic communication campaign to highlight their extremism, to deflate, to empower, to expose the realms of life in isil government territories acupuncture them in such a way that the alienated disenfranchised youth in tunis or in libya doesn't see it as an

attractive, noble or heroic thing to go and join this group. i think that's the way we need to approach that, to undermine them and to deflate them rather than to exaggerate their capabilities. >> thank the gentleman. mr. o'rourke. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general flynn, thank you for your testimony, for your service. i think he made a number of excellent points, including the need to have a clear and comprehensive strategy from the administration before we move forward with an authorization for use of military force. you also talked about our need to rethink our relationships with our regional allies. i think he said something to the effect if they fail to adhere to global standards and norms and values, and international law that we need to rethink our ties. i think you may be said cut off those ties but when i think about our allies, the royal family in saudi arabia, the leadership in yemen, maliki

prior in iraq, general sisi, these are governments that in many cases are amongst the most corrupt or venal or repressive in the world. and yet they are our allies in this fight. how do we pursue a strategy in that region? and be consistent to device that you give us what you think is is really good advice. and i think those repressive regimes and our relationships with them complicated our ability to be effective in the middle east. >> so thanks very much for asking that question. this is the essence of the problem. this is not a military phenomenon that we are facing back to the ranking members this is about what he was talking with military and boots on the

ground and everybody is sort of throws that phrase around the we need to stop using that. we need to understand what does that mean. this is a social cultural and psychological phenomenon particularly in the arab world and the potential breakdown of sort of arab world order over time, if we do not change this mindset and really move some of these countries to change their internal behavior, what we saw in egypt as an example of essentially free regimes, now president of sese in there and what presidents easy, he is just trying -- president sisi, a census to vote for the config the return to any kind of prosperity. i think a country like jordan the king there and how they treat their population and how they are being really

exceptional, moderate example within this very very difficult part of the world that we are in there are others, there are other templates if you out there. but the underlying conditions that are think everybody recognizes all of us recognize it is underlying conditions don't change then what is going to happen is this probably is going to continue to grow and it's going to undermine the stability of these countries to the point where they are going to lose. they will eventually and it's not just iraq and syria in what we are seeing there. we are already talking about a lot of other places around the transit region area are at risk. i think of what just happened with this separatist movement down in yemen, this woman has been going on for a long long time. and then, of course, you got al-qaeda took over this military base. libya, those two states right

now, and we should look at ourselves. those two states right now are failing or failed states or would become that way because who will recognize human? will be us or is it going to be iran? iran fully backs that separatist movement that just took over yemen and that was a country that we were trying to defeat this threat this sunni version of radical islam. so this is a really, that's the essence of the problem and we have to look at how do we want to act when someone sits at the table of the united states of america, they better be sitting there fully recognized in international law and at least having a recognition of international accepted norms and behaviors. if they don't we are being hypocritical. >> and i wonder if we have the will to act on that and to really deliver some

consequences, withdrawing military aid isolating those countries, rethinking our relationships. in the past we have proven unable to do that or unwilling for public important tactical or strategic reasons and i think we will be tested right there. my time is a. thank you, mr. chairman. >> just real quickly we are not chained by oil. the united states is a longer chained to the middle east for oil. that's a big deal so sorry. sorry, chairman. >> appreciate it. >> general flynn, i have a question for you. i'm really concerned that just this week president barack obama was interviewed and compared fighting basis to a big city mayor fighting crime. and that really troubles me because there's no comparison. that's a horrible and poor analogy. in a big city if you have

criminals like muggers, carjackers, drug dealers they're not trying to kill the mayor and take over the city government. which is what isis is trying to do in the fairest countries in the middle east. and they want to take over destabilize jordan and saudi arabia, ultimately go after israel. there's just no comparison to a big city mayor fighting crime. are you troubled by that type of analogies? does it indicate you like it does to me that he just doesn't get it? >> what i have said is that you cannot defeat an enemy that you do not admit exist. and i really, really strongly believe that the american public needs and wants moral intellectual and really strategic clarity and courage on this threat. there is no comparison, and it's

not to take away the danger that exists with the thugs and criminals that are in our own system but that's not what it is we are facing in this discussion that we're having right now. it's totally different. >> also let me change the subject and ask about guantánamo bay. and it was an interesting exchange over in the senate the other day, and i friend and colleague senator tom cotton of arkansas was talking to an administration official and making the point that the fight was brought to our homeland before guantánamo bay ever existed. and even as the president succeed in shutting it down, the fight will continue against us. so do you agree with me that it's important to have a place where we can detain the worst of the worst until, which takes them out of the fight and till such time as maybe they go

before a military tribunal or in some way face justice? and that that outweighs whatever propaganda affect the bad guys have who will find something to criticize us for if they don't have that? >> thank you for asking that question. a couple things. there are three ways to do with a terrorist. you kill them. you captured them. or you turned them and you work with these partner nations around the world. and the saudis had a pretty effective program a few years back where they were turning them, dealing with events and things like that. those are the three ways to deal with the terrorists. we say this gets back to the question on the aumf. because right now we are not capturing anybody. we might go out and detain somebody and it's worked between the military and the fbi like we did with this guy in libya but

there's a lot of other hundreds of others out there that we probably would benefit from capturing. we used to say when i was in the special operations community that had we not had the ability to professionally interrogate those that we captured, the high value targets by the mid-value targets, we might as well take that cadillac, bring it home and parked in the garage. because the caption of individuals in this environment is actually it's the best form of intelligence that you can get. bar none. i have lived it. i have run those facilities, and we know how to do them very professionally because we learned a really ugly lesson in over 10 years ago now. so you have to be able to do that. >> thank you. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> mr. cooper. he's not here.

ms. graham. >> thank you very much for being here this morning. you touched a bit on other terrorist groups in the region. could you please provide an update on hezbollah? thank you. >> in you guys can talk i mean hezbollah is an iranian backed group. they are, i believe we are still designating them as a terrorist organization, our state department. hezbollah is deeply involved in syria. they're fighting in syria, members of hezbollah are fighting and their leading and doing some of the sort of what i would call, so the special operations trading of some of the syrian forces. hezbollah is involved in yemen's. hezbollah is from involved in lebanon and some of the

destruction of things in that particular country. and hezbollah is involved in in iraq as well. members of hezbollah are in fact, inside of iraq fighting with what i would describe as what we used to call the organization which is, we know is led by members of a rant irgc. hezbollah is a very dangerous organization. a responsible for killing many, many americans. and we do not let them sort get a pass on any of this. >> let me just say very quickly that hezbollah actually has been in a very difficult position for the last several years because of actual incident which has been quite controversial. it's exposed in ways that never was before. it enjoyed in the past every in prague to base, if i was able to

play a comment role of notches she politics in lebanon but in the overall lebanese political system. now lebanon is a state that is hanging on by its think e-mails more than 1 million syrian refugees, growing signs of sectarianism conflict and violence. and even a lot, and increasing side of grumblings sang what happened to protecting our interests? why are our boys going out and dying in this area? but also at the same time radicalization of those shia communities saying why aren't you doing more? the leadership of hezbollah is clearly, yes it is good a dangerous and extreme the capable and robust organization but this is probably the most difficult political situation it has faced in many, many years. it no longer can claim to speak to a broad resistance to issue. nobody believes that anymore because they have seen no

sunnis believe that because it's it seemed hezbollah men out there killing and murdering sunni civilians. so they have lost that card. they are much weaker because the lebanese state -- state is much weaker. it's a difficult time for them and they are having a difficult time navigating this new situation. >> 's thank you, congresswoman. your thing i would add is i mentioned the word of sectarianism numerous times in my oral testimony. i find this to be a very important issue that we have to understand that one of the ways in which extremist ideologies can become more mainstream is one side of polarized people feel like they have to ecocide no choice but to put aside. and the only candidates for their votes are extremist organizations in this very polarized department. i worry about the sectarian violence in syria being exported other neighboring countries and creating a wider sectarian conflict. hezbollah is one of the workstations that could be a conduit for the spread of

violence and lebanon as a country with a very interesting sort of denominational system of representation. is really the kind of country that would be inaudible to the sectarian violence going forward. >> thank you. i appreciated the opportunity. >> mr. wittman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen thank you so much for your testimony. general flynn, how worried are you about american citizens becoming radicalized, training overseas and returning to the united states? and other additional steps that the u.s. should take in addressing those citizens that travel to train with isis in syria, and iraq and then later to return back to the united states and that's what they would pose? i would like to get your perspective. >> first i think that our fbi and the leadership of the fbi is doing a phenomenal job dealing with this issue here in the

homeland. just give all perspective, when somebody shows up in syria, okay? which has been going on for a while. they do a little betting of who these individuals are. and if it's somebody who just came over to sort of get their jihad on so to speak, they may just tell them you're going to be a suicide bomber, is what we're going to do, here's where you're going to operate and go forth and do good. in the other parts of the vetting they look for individuals who have different skill sets who have savvy with the internet who have some leadership skills, who maybe have some engineering capabilities. so they're sophisticated in how they recruit, particularly when they arrive. and those individuals then get put into a different pipeline. they may not get put into the suicide attacker pipeline, they may get put into different pipeline. and those are the