. . .

. . .

>> if you could talk a little bit about what's happening in our local communities as i mentioned outside of my time arab-american communities in the united states and in particular in michigan, i know your department is engaged with the community and secretary johnson has been engaged as well. can you tell us how important those are and what we should expect in the future. >> secretary johnson has visited and engaged with quite a number of communities across the country. i visited detroit in my prior capacity at u.s. citizenship and immigration services from a different perspective at the time and i also, visited in

minneapolis, boston and new york, our efforts are absolutely vital. one of the things that we are focused as a department and quite frankly across the government is being in the community and identifying and empowering and equipping local trusted voices to be the critical marriages in the battle to counter violent extremism whether they be faith leaders, educators, kentuckyic leaders and the like, our office for community partnerships equips local communities with tools, with tool kits and messages, also helps them identify the symptoms of an individual on the path to radicalization across the administration.

we create it had inner radical organization but across the government. and so we have harness the resources of the federal bureau of investigation, national counter center that are focused on the security and safety of the american people. we work in the communities, with the communities, partnering with them to really amplify the voices and really employ the tools to reach the people who are on the path to radicalization. >> in a number of communities that you mentioned and others that i know you're involved, what have you found the reaction from those communities, have they been active and willing partners and do you consider them allies in your efforts? >> we very much consider them strong allies, they themselves share the concern not only the safety of the nation but the

respective communities, no one, no parent warrants to lois -- lose a child to violent extremism. no want wants to lose a child travel to a conflict zone and join terrorism, no responsible parent would. we have brought groups into the office of homeland security and, into our offices to understand perspectives and better understand the sensitivities and to frankly learn from them how best we can partner together. we do not, of course, have a monopoly on the best ideas on how to both work with and impact the community that is we are trying to reach. and so it's very much a collaborative effort and partnership with the communities. >> thank you, my time has expired and i appreciate the

effort of both you. >> secretary mayorgas, is terrorist watch list and with no fly list? >> yes, the data in la application is run through multiple databases. >> okay, so beyond -- you have terror watch list, no fly-list, fbi criminal database that the records keeping process for our criminal record, what other databases? >> it is the watch list, the no fly-list. our law enforcement database that is you have identified and other intelligence databases and

i can certainly provide substance subsequent to this hearing greater specificity. >> here is my question, when we look at the attacks that happened both in paris number one and subsequently in brussels, my question is this, we know that many of the european and in particular, united kingdom, france and belgium have actually received some of the greatest numbers of the foreign fighters that have gone back and forth between iraq and syria, and my question is pretty straightforward either the paris, those that we know that were involved in the paris attacks or brussels attacks, were any of those individuals not on our terror watch list or our no-fly list which is a

smaller subset of the terror watch list or or other databases. do you know the answer to that? >> i do not. i would defer to our experts and i will certainly follow up with you, senator. >> so this is an important question and the reason i think it's an important question because we are only as good as the information that we have. and we can add additional questions on the visa waiver checklist but we don't do an in-person interview for those who apply to the visa waiver program, correct? >> we do not do a consular, that's correct. >> we've added additional questions, it's really what comes in and goes out that's most important to how valid, how we are doing. so i think it's really important for this committee to understand a, any of the individual that is

we know have been identified that have been involved in paris, that have been identified with brussels were they on the terror watch list, were they on any of our other databases? if not, then we better understand why not and we better understand as we look at the countries of origin that we see if there are gaps in our information sharing. and the reason i ask it that it's been pretty publicize of at least one of the individuals involved in the attack that is were not acted upon. and so would you agree with me it's pretty important to understand because it's only as good as the information we have in terms of how this vetting happens? >> if i may, senator.

this is absolutely an important issue. whether or not an individual is on a no-fly list is not necessarily dispositive of whether our security vetting would prevent an individual who would pose a threat or danger. >> well, i would agree, but we are more likely -- if they're not on terror list, which is a broader list than no-fly, no-fly is a subset of terror. they're not in terror or fbi list or some of the databases that we obviously can't discuss here, if they're no where, it's a lot less likely that we are going to discover them. >> senator, not necessarily. >> tell me, why. >> i will keep it specific for the visa waiver program. it's a comprehensive application and, in fact, in our effort to strengthen the visa waiver program, the president clinton

has become more comprehensive and so we have picked up data of an individual traveler that is not necessarily in our databases but we have picked up data about that traveler that has revealed information that has enabled us to deny the -- that individual's ability to travel based on -- >> so let me ask you this, how many visa waiver president clintons are there? how many are in the program? >> i would have to get you that. >> i think it's important to understand that. how much individual investigation is done on each of those applications? in other words if i get an application, how much follow up is done on that application? >> i would like to have opportunity experts brief you on a classified setting as to how we address the extraordinary amount of information we receive on those applications.

>> okay, this is what i'm trying to get out here. i know there were deficiencies in belgium, but information-sharing is a critical piece here for us to protect citizens whether in the visa waiver program or not, but in particular with this category of individuals because they don't have to take the extra step to get a visa. i think it's important whether it's in classified setting or not that we understand, a, the individuals that were involved in brussels and paris, were any of them in our intelligence databases. number two, how many folks do we actually have in this visa waiver program. and number three, on a hard-paper application how many of those do we have the opportunity to actually individually investigate aspects of that application. so that's why the list become important. that's why the intelligence databases become important because presumably with the numbers we can't individually investigate each application. so what worries me is that you

have a significant obviously of foreign fighters that have returned to the european countries and the sharing of information with allies is critical and also the critical piece of how effective our visa waiver program is. i know my time is up but i hope that we'll have an opportunity to really break this down so we can understand fully how thorough the vetting in this country. thank you. >> mr. chairman, may i seek your indulgence? >> sure, i'm going to seek your indulgence next. >> allow me to make a number of points. first, we vet every single application of the visa-waiver application, every single one, number one -- >> what does that vetting vofl? >> checking against our databases, not only the name of the individual but also against databases and extensive holdings

all of the information that we collect through that application, and so sometimes the information that is of secondary importance, not necessarily pertinent to the individual, but pertinent to other individual's identities who we identify on the application has proven to be quite material in our security vetting and i could explore further with you in a different classified setting, number one, number two, the ease with which an individual might travel within -- from one european country to another by way of example is very different than the ease with which or the difficulty with which someone might travel from a european country to the united states. our security protocols, the last point of departure airports is extraordinarily robust and we have multiple layers of security, and so the country from one foreign country to

another is not to be viewed as synonomous from an individual who traveled from a foreign country to the united states specifically. thirdly, some -- there's a difference between a refugee, to give a particular example, being processed across a border from one european country to another and what we consider and what we employ as our security vetting, the difference between the processing of an individual, the capturing of boy graphic individual and allowing the individual to travel through within the european zone, ultimately to resettle there it's a very, very different process that are multitier rigorous screening of refudge ice here in the united states. >> well, mr. secretary, i appreciate your discretion but that's why i want to know how many folks are in the database or not and second the refugee

issue is a separate issue versus i'm a citizen of belgium, i'm in the visa waiver program. i would like to know what the volume is and how much follow up if we don't have someone on the database if we don't have someone to do. >> mr. chairman, i don't normally interject. i would like 30 seconds just to say something. we haven't talked a lot about the preclearance program. i hope we have the opportunity to do that. it pushes out our borders further. everybody that comes on visa waiver, we collect, if i'm not

mistaken biometrics. a lot of work has been done and we need to acknowledge. >> i want a quick chime in. from what i know, i will give you my rational, i believe the greatest threat we have in terms of risk factors ranked of foreign fighters or isis operatives coming to america and threatening the homeland, the least risk is the refudge eye program because with proper vetting we can really take no risk there with the number we are bringing. that's the lowest risk. isis coming through south america. next lowest risk, next highest risk would be visa waiver

program, highest risk coming through our porous voter. i just want your ranking, no rationale, we will talk about it later in the questioning. what do you think is the lowest risk to the highest risk. >> i haven't ranked them. i would want to think about them. >> so that's fine, mr. siberell, think about because i will come back to in my question, mr. siberell, do you have a quick answer to that. >> with the program, this program enables us and provides us huge leverage of over the visa-wafer program partners to require improvements and strengthening of own processes and therefore makes a border security program, it's very strong. >> again, i'm a supporter,

honestly the ranking is kind of obvious. think about it. i will come back to my question. i don't want to take my time of senator's questioning. >> gentlemen, thank you very much for the incredibly difficult work you have and do every day, the service that you render to our country. there were really colossal and consequential intelligence failures in our european allies to allow these to take place. we understand that there are a lot of gaps to collect information about people who traveled to fight with isis in syria, iraq and now even libya. even some of the countries themselves and we now know that belgium has got a lot of problems internally from a federal system divided by language, geography, culture, there are eight different security agencies, three languages, seven parliaments and

brussels a city of 1.2 million people, there are 19communes, each with its own administration, their muslim communities are very different than ours because as muslim americans define themselves as american and european muslims don't have that. there are a lot of challenges with our european allies. within the eu general heaven that eu shares more than with the united states which is a good thing than with each other be u this allows challenges and problems in europe to fester and explode as we have seen. which has a lot of overlapping stove-piped security entities. and i would just like to for a second look at european -- what's happened since the belgium attack in our european allies and to see if they are

start to go really change their procedures, their policies and do you believe that there's buy-in for sharing across borders in european countries really around counterterrorism, if you're adequate coordination going on, information sharing and the like? and either of you can respond. >> i'm happy to jump in first, senator, thank you very much. so the issue of information sharing is critical asia identified in my opening remarks. of course, critical to homeland security in terms of sharing of information with us and it very well may be truth that they share more information with us than with each other because we demand that information in order for travelers to arrive here in the united states either through the visa waiver program or -- or otherwise. they have, in fact, advanced considerable in the sharing of information, understanding

imperative post paris and post brussels attacks. i can cite specific examples. we are very encouraged that the european union passed a passenger-name record pnr agreement for the collection agreement for passenger record data, information that's critical snapshot of who the individual is well advanced of the travel within the european territory. number one, they have empowered and equipped as a central repository information and cooperation, really a coordination of which we participate considerably in the election and dissemination, sharing of information. they have a smuggling center in europe and it's it's a great hub.

i think they are serving tremendous meppeddous advances in the collection of sharing information. they have a ways to go. they do not necessarily collect and share passenger information with each other, they are marshalling through the process and interest that is have served as the challenge in the past. i would defer to my colleagues with all of that. >> there's political will now within europe for improving their own systems, integrating watch lists, beginning to collect pnr data and use that effectively as secretary mayor mayorkas noted it's someone late and coming but it is a factor of the fact that they have large

numbers of fighters that have gone for some time. we have seen greater willingness that they need to improve system and ownership up to work closely with us since they had been which is already close. >> we after after september 11 attacks, created fusion centers, you are mentioning things like europe hole, but are they replicating what's been successful here in terms of the fusion centers that we are using? are we seeing them move rapidly in that direction? >> we see them do and i will also refer to secretary, i think the aspiration is for ultimately a unified list like we have developed since 9/11. in the meantime what they need

to do is build better integration within that list and you have a single point between all of their holdings, that is an area that we can help them and provide technical assistance as we work through that project. >> the house just passed hr4314, counterterrorism screening and the system's act to accelerate our role in supporting them and i guess my question is, you know, there's a lot that we have learned, a lot of resources we have, a lot of technology that we have developed, how can our systems better help them improve their capabilities or things that we should be doing to help share those best practices and provide that kind of technology that this body here should be acting on with great liberate urge cri. >> senator, i would say, absolutely, yes. i think they are improving in

the sharing of information. we are working to make sure that they are. i am actually joining the attorney general and others, general taylor, the leader of intelligence analysis office who is here today, we are going to europe on tuesday to address the very much that you raised. we have offered our technological advances in this area, secure real-time platform, the automated targeting system global, we have offered those critical instruments that we ourselves have developed and avail ourselves of to assist them in this security imperative. >> great, i don't have time to go in this line of question, but i want to reiterate in terms of cd efforts.

they legitimize, and i want to encourage the efforts that i'm seeing that are going on that allowing a thousand flowers that floom that are more authentic voices and one of the most authentic voices is former foreign fighters who themselves have been diselusioned with toks -- toxicity and i would like to say that encourage you. i was very happy about the state department and unveiling the joint strategy, i hope that we are investing substantively in cd and i say this to secretary johnson.

it should not mean law enforcement, but other efforts that are going on that are empowering local communities help to go elevate authentic voices and do the things that actually work to counter violent extremism. >> senator, we couldn't agree more. the voices in the community. i attended an extraordinarily pure to pure challenge where students from all over the world competed in developing programs that countermessages. it came from students and focused on reaching students. facebook was a critical partner in that endeavor.

faith leaders, teachers, parents. pierce, most critically and you have identified an extraordinarily powerful voice in those who once were on the wrong path and realized the great problems of their prior ways. >> thank you, sir, and that's muis toik my ears. first, i want to start with a comment because we have had a lot of great discussion in terms of isis propaganda and combating that. senator portman had mentioned earlier in his comments that we really need that government wide coordination in combating propaganda as well as in the communities and i share those concerns, i think all of us do and i have joined with chairman johnson and senator booker in

introducing a bill that would require the president to combat social media, i hope that we are able to move that bill forward in the senate and i want to thank both of you for partnering on that. we have a lot of folks that are concerned and hope to work with you as we move through and then deputy secretary if i could start with you, i do understand the benefits of visa waiver program. i know that we have it. senator was echoing some of the concerns. we have 38 countries that participate in that; is that correct? >> yes. >> are they all meeting necessary requirements as they move through their vetting? >> senator, thank you very much, the requirements are

prerequisite to joining the visa-waiver program and to remaining in the visa waiver program. we have strengthened that under secretary john's leadership. if, in fact, a country, if we determine or assess that a country is falling short under the visa-waiver program we develop a remediation plan with a timeline and strict requirements to ensure that no traveler that's arriving in the united states poses a threat to the united states. we have, in fact, employed that mechanism when a country has fallen short and so we are quite rigorous in in the requirements of the visa-waiver program. are any of those country that are not meeting the requirements right now? >> senator, there are. we have them on programs and any further details i would be happy to share with you in a different setting. >> certainly, i appreciate that

because that is something that the public is concerned about, is we have a number of countries involved in this and the public really doesn't know what's being followed up on, i think as long as we stay on top of that it's regular that they're meeting security requirements, how do we check that? how do we know that? >> yes, and i should say, this underscores one of the critical benefits of the visa-waiver program, which is that we do have this leverage with another country, a country that wishes to remain in the program, we use it as a tool tone sure compliance with extraordinarily stringent obligations that serve the security of our homeland. it's a perfect example how the visa-waiver program serves as a tool of security rather than otherwise. i do wish the name was changed because the term waiver would

suggest some sort of relaxation of the security requirement, when, in fact, the opposite is true, not only do we capture an enormous amount of information about the individual traveler wishing to avail him or herself of the program but we also use the program and other nations desire to participate in it as a driver of information sharing, information collection and greater security partnership with the united states. it really duck tails with the question that senator booker posed with respect to how a european country does in its security mechanisms, perhaps it does better with us than with each other by virtue of their participation of the visa-waiver program and their desire to avail themselves of that program. >> okay, thank you. i appreciate that explanation. and mr. siberell, media reports

indicate that we send a sugar team to brussels, a month before attacks there. and what challenges prifnted us in and the belgium authorities from preventing the attacks? and additionally, is our surge team still on the ground there, if you could answer that first, please? >> thank you, senator, the sugar team deploy today brussels, i should say that followed on a cooperation that's been -- we've had undergoing with european countries since 2013 when the problem of individuals traveling to syria first manifested itself. this is before isil was a factor and it was with other isolated groups.

are there gaps that we can identify? so we put together it's a dialing that's quite mature and open. the belgium government is open to these consultations and across issues like document integrity, passport issuance integrity. targeted screening that are developed. better integration of watch list and information sharing. all of these areas were identified in the foreign fighter search team. they are ongoing, exactly. we are continuing to send individuals back and forth.

>> it's an elevated partnership effectively. >> is there anything that could have been done by our surge team to help close that gap? >> i'm not aware of any specific information that would have been provided or revealed our our surge team members prior to the attack. >> okay. as you know i'm going to jump to the iraqi kurdish for a moment. it's one of our critical partner if not the most critical partner against the fight of isis. we understand that the administration just allocated or designated $415 million in financial assistance to iraqi kurdish forces and can you provide the committee with additional detail on where the assistance will come from, who it will be going to and what

purpose that will be for? >> senator, i think i will have to take that question back and get you an answer. from a counterterrorism perspective i would agree with you that the kurdish forces have been among our kloseest partners in coordination with the government of iraq provided a critical counter to isil and pushed out of isil of considerable areas including in northern iraq and the kurdish continue to play a critical role with us in the coalition to confront isil. >> i would certainly appreciate that. gentlemen, thank you for being here today. i certainly appreciate your time and efforts. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you, senator ernst. mrs. siberell talked about isis has gone to directing activity to inspiring. i would agree that al-qaeda directed and so that brand of islamic terrorist was a centralized operation, activity,

but my take on isis is that their method outside of caliphate, their territory they're enfiring but what concerns me is they are beginning to direct. isn't it true that there are reports that they had a hand in directing the brussels attack, there's been different names begin to go direct. they have gone beyond just inspire to go having this external operations unit and starting to direct attacks. >> senator, i think you pointed out the essential difference and why isil poses a new kind of challenge that al-qaeda had previously. al-qaeda was made up effectively of individuals who had to become a member, had to be vetted effectively by the organization and then were operated in a manner secretly in a number of

locations around the world in which divide plots and isil works in a completely different model. they do have core of individuals concentrated in iraq and syria, they have a very discipline military structure to pursue effort there, but statement they make use of the internet, social media to inspire others, individual who is may not have actually become members of the group but act on their behalf. the internet and social media having access to those platforms in a way that al-qaeda never was successful in using. if i could just answering, you know, question, it is true, yes, isil is looking to -- has identified, we know that they have identified those with stills that could be useful in

infiltrating back to their home countries to carry out plots. so the external operation's network that isil has developed is a very real danger and we've been working against it and have some success in doing so, but it is absolutely the case, they've also not only trained operatives but trained individuals who inspire attacks using social media deliberately including individuals in the united states. >> so we may be nibbling around the edges, we may take some of that territory back in iraq but they are growing, evolving and start to go send out their operatives. the refugee flow, the enormous, 1.8 million refugees flowing into europe and i'm going to go back, again, my question because i think the answer is quite obvious. the refugee program, we can assure that whatever the number is, 10,000, those refugees should pose no risk.

you said it criteria, women and children, relatives of syrian american citizens, they have the financial capability of supporting them, again, 10,000 out of 4 million displaced refugees, we can make sure that we take no risks on those refugees. the same with visa waiver program. i agree. i think it is a , you know, combined with free clearance we can combine the risks. the least concern is the refugee program and next the visa waiver and by far the greatest concern is our porous southern border, correct, when we were down in central america i heard a new term, sia, special interest aliens and isn't that true and doesn't that point the fact that we have to secure our border? mr. siberell, you first. >> i think those are three

categories of concern and we have to make sure they are effective and preventing threats to the american people. ly also point out that certainly where i've witnessed, isis is very strategic. you don't take your little -- your foreign force and take over vast territory in iraq without playing this and being very strategic and as we watched them dangerously evolved, i'm highly concerned. mr. mayor kas. >> first of all we are very focused on special-interest alien, individuals from designated countries that seek to enter the united states illegally. we are extraordinarily focused on that. we may not agree today, mr. chairman, on the level of security on the southwest border.

that border in our estimation is more secure than it has been in a long, long time. the -- one of the primary areas of concern -- >> let me just stop you right there. in terms of the actual numbers. unaccompanied children from central america, let me get it here. in 2014 the enormous surge year to date through april which is last summer we had 25,500 unaccompanied children, as of prail 2016, 25,359, we are at the exact same level year to date of unaccompanied children. in terms of family units, we are ahead. in terms of total number of apprehensions on the border in 2014 year to date we are 261,000, last year sam point we were down 182. right now we are at 223.

so i do not see improvement in terms of security to our border. it represents an enormous risk. let's finish. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. first of all, the unaccompanied children and the family units pose a unique challenge because by in large, those individuals fleeing the three central american countries, guatemala, el salvador, honduras, are not trying to evade law enforcement. >> if you want to talk about the numbers i did, total apprehensions which are at par with 2014 -- >> and 2014 was far different and far lower than prior years, but if i may get into the point of how we ensure the security of the border and specifically with respect to the terrorist threat. one of the challenges in the

smuggling of individuals is the transnational willing participants in the smuggling of individuals who are members of terrorist or organizations, in fact, we have quite the opposite that they wish no part in the overt smuggling participation in the smuggling of terrorist and perhaps it is andled make sense that it is for fear that they would bring even greater force to the united states to bare on their organizations. the question is are there low-level individuals in these organizations who unwittingly may be smuggling individuals who are, in fact, a terrorist, we are very focused on that, our law enforcement officers are border agents are extraordinarily focused on that and we have on not observed any increasing concern but that does

not suggest that we don't have an increase in vigilance. >> okay, thank you, mr. secretary. senator carper. >> thanks, mr. chair. i just want to return to the last part of the conversation. i'm going to go back to what -- i quoted peter just a moment, i will ask my staff to find the quote for me. we have been down to the border in central america and as we know the reason why those people, kids, families are coming up here is because dangerous and lack of hope opportunity and the chairman put a finger on the root cause and that's demand for drugs. we seend money and guns down to honduras, guatemala and el salvador and the gangs use it to make life miserable for them. thank you.

make life miserable for folks. if we had kids we probably wanted to come up here as well. the border is a needle in the hay stack problem. but we also need to make the a sack a lot smaller and part of is through partnership with the three central american countries and version of colombia, partnership that they've established and that we are helping to support. i want to go back to -- i told the chairman i thought a few minutes ago asked a number of important questions. one of was to rank the order of the threat and he said i think wisely, wisely, they try to be stupid to vet down refugee program and mostly toughly vetted program for people coming

into this country and for the outside of getting here after two years, they're not going to do that. visa waiver will make it more difficult. we need to tighten preclearance and some of the other things that we talked about. but i want to go back to what better bergan said in this testimony i think last november. every person that has been killed by jihad terrorist in this country has been killed by an american citizen or resident, been killed by an american citizen or resident and our focus wisely needs to be how do we reach out to folks in this country and make sure that they don't become radicalized and we can't do it by ourselves, we need to grow the partnerships and work with families and organizations and so forth. and continue to work and we need to fund that and make that effectively as we can. i talked to folks in other

countries to see why they are so challenged in europe by the -- some of the folks in the muslim community. they've had incredible migration. we had relatively little. they have incredibly large numbers, millions of people from syria and other places to europe. a lot of times when they get to their countries they're not very warmly welcome and they end up living isolated lives and blocked off and perceive they're not welcomed there, they're not much hope for opportunity and they are very sup acceptable to radicalization. one of the questions to our tamping down in those threats here, people still get radicalized here, but we want people when they come from syria or they come from the other countries where they are fleeing horror, we want to -- we want them to feel a part of this country and the american dream,

we will provide a lot more safety and security for our people than a lot of the other things we are talking about here today. senator portman asked some questions about isis campaign success and so forth, i just asked my staff to pull out metrics which we like metrics here. and i just we wanted to hit a couple of bullet points. they've lost about 40% of the territory that they once held in iraq, 40%. coalition forces have killed more than 10,000 isis fighters in isis leaders, including chief, propagandist and executioner and simultaneously enhancing capabilities of iraqi terrorism forces. as you know iraqi forces from isis this year, campaigns to seize and are underway.

in may 2016, the fbi director said that the rate at which americans are joining isis has developed in the last nine months. in 2014 six to ten americans were leaving to join isis. i think that was every month. today it's down to about 1 per month in may 2016 isis announced that isil controls 14% of iraqi territory that's down from about 40%. u.s. treasury department estimate that is due to the combination of falling oil prices, smalling interdiction and coalition air strikes, as low as 250 million per year, that's about half of what they used to be. are we done? no. is what we are doing working, yes. and we need to continue to do more of that, find out what works and do more of that. and a couple of questions and i just ask for a short answers, though. mr. siberell, can you describe

the kinds of improvements that the foreign fighter search team is helping bem gums to implement, additionally is there a possibility for the teams to be deployed to other countries in europe? very briefly. >> yes. increased and enhanced information sharing, integration of watch list, risk-base traveler screening, technique that we have built in the united states that would be helpful to belgiums. >> thank you. i think you call it doxing, can you tell me how the country fights this threat? >> the practice of taking the names and whatever information is available about an individual

and publishing the name and that information and identifying the -- that individual as a potential target of terrorism. and so isil and other terrorist organizations will essentially docks, will take, for example, information about military personnel that they pick off a website and they will publish it and they will identify those individuals as potential targets. >> good, one more last question for you all. how would we with respect to soft targets, protecting soft targets, how would we increase the security of untraditional unsecured areas, let's say of an airport, and how would we do so in a way that does not further encumbered, please? >> thank you, senator. the airport specifically even before brussels.

as a matter of fact, i visited los angeles airport a month ago and met with the leaders of airport security there to talk about how they secure the perimeter. this is was post brussels but they started long before. they had visited israel, a great deal of experience in airport security as a place of mass assembly and instituted quite a number of safeguards, the equipment at the airport and the manner in which the airport is both designed and built were -- add very much security in mind. we work through national protection and programs decorate and i know you don't like acronyms. >> i like dhs. >> as i do. as do i. that organization under the leadership of caitlin.

[laughter] >> to ensure that they are well trained and well equipped to respond as soft targets to a potential mass casualty event. >> thanks very much. thanks for your work and commitment and devotion to our country and leadership in your respective departments. there's going to be threat around the country maybe as long as we are going to be around and certainly as far as the eye can see. these guy change their tactics and we have to change what we are doing in response. i think we are doing a lot of smart stuff, smart things that we need to do. when i get back, mr. chairman, earlier in vietnam this weekend and talked to a number of folks in that country where we have a much better partnership than i would ever imagine when i was

flying over there in the war, but the pitter of working together element as a team in many respects is very amazing given our history there. but i use this phrase and i think it's probably germane here as well. if -- if you want to go fast, travel alone, if you wanting to far, travel together. if you wanting to far travel together. it's really what we are trying to do. it's not just in our country, congress and the executive branch, military and so forth, homeland security. all across the world folks know that this is a cancer in our planet and we have to deal with it. but if we go together, go together, work together, pull together, we will go a long way. thank you very much so much. >> thank you, senator carper, unfortunately what you're saying is true, we are going to be living with this for quite some sometime and it's unfortunate.

we are certainly old enough what the world felt like before global islamic terror and started slaughtering people. it's a reality that didn't exist and does exist. as i mentioned the witnesses beforehand, the purpose of every hearing is to deepen our understanding, lay out the realities, whether we like them or not we have to face them and that's kind of what i've been trying to point out. not whether we like but actually have to face so we can deal effectively with it. i certainly appreciate the witnesses' time. this is going to be a long struggle but we will shorten if we actually admit we've got the problem and face it the way we have to as a committed coalition of the willing of the civilized portions of the world. this is an attack on civilization and it's got to be defeated.

so with that, the hearing record will remain open for 15 days for june 10 at 5:00 p.m. for submission and statements and this meeting is adjourned. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> in addition to the graduating class that's all over god's planet, i wish you'd be graduating into a world of peace, light and love, but that's not the case. we all live in a fairy tale but i guess the 1% does. >> this memorial watch commencement speeches in their entirety offering advice and encouragement to the graduating class of 2016 from business leaders of michael powell, founder of oracle, larry at the university of southern california and maria contreras, administrator of small business administration at whittier

college. >> what makes you special, what distinguishes you from others? in business we call tit unique value proposition, figuring out yours is key. >> politicians senator jeff sessions at the university of alabama in huntsville and senator barbara and governor mike pents. >> to be strong and courageous and to learn to stand for who you are and what you believe is a way that you change here and will carry into the balance of your life. >> and white house officials, vice president joe biden at the university of notre dame and president barack obama. >> throughout a history a new generation of americans has reached up and bent the arc of

history in the direction of more freedom and more justice and class of 2016, it is your turn now to shape our nation's destiny as well as your own so get to work. >> commencement speeches this memorial day at noon eastern on c-span. ..