that risk in home station. for the second and i to build on her point, it's our ability to ensure that we are simultaneously ready for not only to continue fight that we are involved in against violent extremism, but also as a secretary of defense is laid out there or for other global challenges that we have to be ready for as an air force, china, russia, iran, north korea, and that's what we absorb some of our risk. spent as a follow-up do you see the libya fighting absorb more by the navy and membranes and air force, or do you think the air force will be more involved both in terms of strikes and also the additional isr, maybe you could update us on what are the caps there? >> i would see would be a combined, it is a combined arms engagement which means all services are engaged. the combatant commander uses all four components as required. sometimes together, sometimes individually as all that's part of his campaign plan.

i don't predict you're going to see one particular component that would be more of us engaged. in fact, we are the most joint force we've been in our history today. in terms of where we are operating out of, that would be a detail i would want to get into. automatic. >> right now we've got, depending on how you measure, we got approximately 60 that we are at. we are also supporting some government owned contract operating caps is one right now we've got four of those and going towards 10. >> you mention incirlik. how confident are you, you will continue to be able to operate out of a incirlik given all of the political turmoil in the wake of last month's failed to? >> i would say there serving as been a lot of turmoil but we certainly condemn in the strongest possible terms the attempted coup. we are beyond that now. many thousands of people have

been arrested and we, of course, defer to the government of turkey as to who needs to be arrested, who needs to be punished for this action. incirlik is a key location. turkey over all is a very, very important ally. i would simply report within the first week or so i had the opportunity to speak with the base commander and he reported to me that our team at incirlik had been treated with the utmost professionalism. we spoke to one of the even higher level commanders the other day and he reiterated that point, that has been ongoing. turkey has been a good ally. time me -- we stand with them. they are an effective airport.

>> i'm interested in the fighter pilot shortfall. eating talk about them what is the universe of fighter pilots in the air force now? what needs to be done in terms of pay or other benefits to retain them? what are the real incentives for the fighter pilots to leave? is it just pay, how much are they getting in the private sector and what can you do in conjunction with the airlines? >> i'm going to yield to my chief fighter pilot for this one spent it's a combination of quality of service and quality of life. the reality is we've been through this before. airlines of them in hiring mode before and we've had to work our way through that. this one is no different. what's added to this is where coming out of 26 is a continual combat, and so the force has

been engaged in a much higher level. that translates to about more time away from home and although the uncertainty that goes with that. in terms of how we're looking to attack us, it is a combined quality of service, quality of life. quality of life has to do with what the secretary talked about which is aviation bonus, how do we get that up to the point where if we ca could remove some financial burdens and provide some incentive, our studies have shown the force will respond. we do need to change the levels that we are authorized to pay because we haven't changed those in years. in fact, we've got to make sure that we remain competitive. there's another part of quality of life, and that is the air force is a family. we take care of each other. there's a culture in the air force such that when an airman is deployed, we take care of that family. that doesn't happen always in the private sector. ensuring that we continue to take care of each other with those of non-kind of financial issues are really important.

i add those to oppose quality of life. quality of service as the pink the best you can be whatever profession you chosen. the reality is pilots who don't fly, maintainers who do not maintain, controllers who don't control i'm not going to stay with the company because we are not allowing them to be the very best they can be. for me as any chief it's about a balance between quality of service and quality of life. i'm confident we will be successful. >> secretary james, the air force put out its latest rfi the excess icbm motors last week. i'm wondering if you've received permission from the president to move forward with this effort? >> we have not. this is a request for information so we literally are requesting information. we have been asked to look at this arena of the excess icbm motors by the congress, and although the bills have not yet

become law, we are getting a jump start on the task. but no, we do not any change in law or policy which would swing one way or another. we are simply trying to become better informed. >> speaking of icbms can you give a status of the ground-based strategic deterrence program? thursday trying to last week that was very short. apparently they would back the air force and said tried to find a way to fund this. can you get a sense of what some of the issues are? what is the current cost estimate of the program? two years ago it was 62.3 billion. what is it today? back in march, general carlos said in a shortage of about 511 pilots. now it's grown to 700. it will grow to a thousand in a year or so. is there a crisis here? it seems like a major jump. you said you been there before. it seems like a large jump, but first on the icbm.

>> i would say with respect to the exact cost estimate of today and what not, we will have to get back to you on that because i don't have to off the top of my. i will say this. if there was something we learned at the dab when we went through it is the magnitude of this type of icbms work, we've not collectively done it for more than 40 years. there's a level of complexity that has to be worked through. we are now engaged working with osd offices to try to ensure that we all have a common understanding of the assumptions that we have to put down on paper in order to properly cost out they gbsd service cost position. so as to actually service cost position, we don't have one yet. asked to verify the number you said a moment earlier, i will have to get back to you because i don't have that off the top of mmy head. >> doesn't mean the program is

on hold right now? milestone a true than it is on hold. >> i will remind you, the rfp is kind of. the program is not on hold. we know some additional information. we all have to get on the same page as to what are the assumptions and how do we cost this going forward. we haven't done such a thing in four years and so we're all getting on the same page. that's the effort that's ongoing. the program is moving forward. the rfp went out spent shouldn't have waited until is complete until he sent out an rfp? >> this is tmrr, technology maturation and risk reduction, and so this was well within the loss of acquisition that we sent the rfp out. >> the sector and i penned an article together and recently stated it is a crisis. having said that here's the reason i believe it's a crisis. air superiority is not an american birthright. it's something you have to fight for and maintain.

we take a look at the number, with the air force does for the nation, which at the foundational level is to gain control of and then exploit air and space. with that of all of our aviators are able to do that and specifically fighter pilots because they are the ones leaving at a high rate. it is a crisis. we are fully engaged. i do believe that quality of service will be equally important to everything we can do in quality of life. if we take a balanced approach i'm hoping we can get these folks to stay. >> the air force just released the lock 23 of j-dam. lockheed recently had their dual-mode plus, guided missile and their positioning that as a

possible j-dam alternative. i'm wondering is the air force considering an alternate force for j-dam.net or are you confident that boeing will be able to supply the number that you need to lock 23? >> we are keeping our options open. this is a matter of getting more information, a matter of the high demand for the precision weapons. and so information can be power. we want to know what else is out there and then we will make a final judgment call after that time comes. >> can you elaborate on those negotiations with boeing? i understand there was some conversation about getting more production capacity out of existing facilities. >> we are working with boeing actively. we're working with other industry partners who are involved with ambition and precision weapons as well. but that's not to say that more could also be helpful. that's why we are at least

exploring these other options. >> in a couple of weeks that would be about six months since b-52's deployed to the centcom area of operations. when that the plan was announced it said that the wind would come back. since then they have started the rotation in the pacific and jumbo brown said it took a while for infrastructure to build up, for b-52's to operate at high operations tempo. is the plan still for them to come back in on the short term? >> i was the error combat command and said, from 2011-2013 and was working with countries over there to goto support the b-52. the issue was a wide wingspan, sort of required widening the taxiways and runways. once that was the way we begin rotations. our plan is to continue having a bomber presence and it will be a combination of a b-1 and b-52

rotation. general brand who is our global strike command commander is working out with centcom to ensure that we have a continued presence there. you will see both, and you'll see that happen as we managed the bomber force not only in said, but also what we are doing in the pacific. right now we've all three bombers, for the first time, exercising their in the pacific. we are managing the bomber force not only for what we push forward also what we do from a global strike perspective from the united states spent so all three of pacific, is there a possible to of all three in centcom? >> i doubted. i say that with a somewhat the bomber and tribute to the joint fight. i don't see in the current operational tempo the requirement for more than one bomber squadron to be there at one time. >> back to the caps on the drones.

quick question. general, you said i think you are at forecast now on top of the normal 60, 5010. can update is when you think you would get to the 10? the broader question is we'll hear about the kind of rotation with demand for, these things. if osd comes back and says can you do more than the 60 plus the 10, our ui security kind of stabilized? .. so now based on the fact that we

ended up with folks locked up in the enterprise for so long, our projections were if we didn't stabilize, we were going to have more folks leave the enterprise than we could bring in. he's been very supportive of allowing us to stay on track. we get to that point in approximately 19 and then at 19 given the demand signal, i predict we will get more demands. for now and then we hope to get the system healthy. >> 60 plus 10 by 2019? >> right. >> please. >> i want to get back to some of your comments on the training, one of the things you noticed is

that pilots don't fly. can you talk about nondeployed availability for pilots right now, how many hours are they getting in the air? >> putting in the perspective of captain grew when i was growing up as an f-16 pilot, i would do three exercises a year. that would be a normal battle rhythm. that played out for me the first night, the first day of desert storm when i along with my rest of fellow pilots got into combat for the first. our leader was former airman of vietnam. i remember calling it off like

it was a walk in the park. there's a surface air missile and we all staired at it. i saw an aircraft hit the dirt, boy, i have not seen that before. [laughter] >> here is what i had seen, every radio call, every visual in the formation, everything i saw i realized i had seen it all before. this is just like red flag and that moment, i can tell you, the confidence that came over my cockpit and so many others that said, okay, we can do this, we know how to do this, we went in and destroyed the target. today's pilot based on the size of the force, the age of the force and continued uptempo demand is getting half of that. that's why we are saying we are able to maintain but the bill payer is home station and so

that's where i'm a believer that morale and -- >> we will leave this now to hear nancy pelosi on objections. this is just getting underway. >> as you all know, our responsibility of member of congress or any public officials is to protect and defend, that's the oath that we take, national security is our first responsibility, that includes national security, neighborhood security, personal security, to protect the american people. under leadership of mr. steve israel our democratic agenda as we go forward is about security, national security, economic security and the security of our democracy. and all of those priorities are being neglected by the fact that congress has not been in session

for weeks and does not intend to be in session for weeks. we have a -- some emergencies that had been there for months that were -- that congress left without addressing. so we are here to talk about congress coming back to get the job done for the american people, to honor our responsibility, to protect them in the case of opioids, in the case of zika, in the case of gun violence protection, the list goes on and on. i'm honored to be here with my colleagues. the distinguished share -- chair of the democratic caucus, congressman becerra. rosa dolores will talk about zika and speak about what's happening at the eu and our

relationships with nato, congressman israel, member of the intelligence committee and andre carson will be expressing some views and addressing the challenges that we have. with that, i want to yield to the distinguished chair to the house democratic caucus, mr. becerra. >> thank you, madame leader. t great to be here with my colleagues. it's not so great to be here with our colleagues in washington, d.c. i just came from florida when everybody is going to -- when will you help to make sure that our kids don't drink contaminated water, by the acts

of the state government, the governor and his officials that took no steps to protect the people in flint and certainly the children in flibt and given that this sunday the energy fund progress vieded by fema, the federal management agency expires, the polks back in flint michigan are asking, when will congress step to the plait. our job is pretty simple, people vote us in to get things done. to make things better for the american people, unfortunately so far this is a congress that has done very little and is, in fact, cut out of town early and not established its job. it doesn't matter if it's zika, lead contamination, you can name it, the american people are wondering when we can get our work done. the leader and the house of representatives on the republican side to bring us back in, let us get our job done. it shouldn't take long for us to

pass -- provide the resources to the folks in florida and other places to deal with zika, it shouldn't take us very long to help the people in flint, michigan. the children in flint, michigan should be able to drink their water from the tap without question. everybody expects that for our children and our families. it's time for congress to get the work done. let me yield from dan edwards. >> thank you very much, chairman and colleagues here today. i have the pleasure to represent a district right here in the washington region but even my my

constuents don't understand why we are not at work. yet we haven't been able to do anything about that. the public health crisis in flint, michigan and the water not clean, we have the ability to do about that and republicans in congress have done nothing. as democrats we have offered solutions to end and to deal with the opioid addiction problem that's happening in communities across the country where 78 people every single day lose their lives to opioid overdoses, we know that we can put the resources to do that. democrats have offered solutions and yet republicans on vacation and they have done nothing and so i join my colleagues here today and say i don't want to

hang out in the fourth district in maryland, i want to be here solving emergencies that can't wait, making sure that -- you know, sadly our communities, our children, know that we are here to do their work, 52 day of vacation, students will be back in school and republicans in congress will still be on vacation. as democrats we want to work and get the job done for the american people and it's time for us to get back to it. thank you and i yield to my colleague cochair of our policy committee rosa delora. >> thank you. i thank my colleague donna edwards and honored to be here, thank you for organizing this effort today and with the rest of my colleagues here this morning. and it really is about discussing some of the most serious challenges that are facing our nation today. the zika virus, the op said

epidemic, it's been mentioned the lead poison in flint, michigan and violence. as predicted the zika virus has rapidly become a health care crisis, more than 7300 cases in the united states and territories including nearly 1,000 expectant mothers. 15 babies have been born with zika-related birth defects and one baby in texas has died. over 40 members of our military have been infected with zika. this is a public health emergency. what does it take to get the republican majority to act? first they commanded that the administration transfer funds and tended to combat the ebola virus and combat zika. the administration complied. $589million was redirected to fight accident in zika. in essence, robbing peter to pay

paul. resources went for the center of disease control who will obligate all remaining funds by the end of september. resources went to the nih and biomedical research and development, both will exhaust funds for vaccines by tend of august. and now because of continued inaction by the republicans, they are going to force the department of health and human resources to take money from the nih, from biomedical research, we know what that means. as some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will stand up and talk about how we need to spend money for biomedical research but nih is going to have to shift some of that money in order to deal with zika, and if they don't, vaccine development will be stopped dead in its tracks. they are forcing to continue to

pay for diagnostics so that we know the scope of the zika outbreak, the money is running out and our public health officials to not combat this virus without additional funding, speaker ryan called the house of representatives back into session so that we can pass legislation that will allow us to effectively respond to the zika virus. does the speaker not realize that for the first time in history our government is telling pregnant women to avoid a u.s. neighborhood in florida, does the speaker not realize that women are being advised not to get pregnant, does the speaker not realize that waiting until september is too late, too late for expectant mothers with zika who are so fearful of baring a child with severe birth defects. too late for the people of miami

and too late for the millions of americans at risk. our job is to protect the american people from zika, opioids, lead poisoning and gun violence. republicans have not responded on this issue and it's time for the republicans to act. let me take also a moment to say thank you to laider pelosi for leading our congressional and we discussed a range of issues with foreign leaders and met with military leaders, their bravery and dedication is inspiring to all of us. we discussed immigration, food security, global poverty reduction, these are critical issues that face our world and the u.s. has an important role the play. the united states cannot and must not put its head in the sand whether they have fighting zika or in addressing these other global issues.

we thank you again leader pelosi and now let me turn it over to you. i'm sorry, congressman. >> thank you, thanks, rosa. when it comes to national security it's not just that republicans are doing nothing, they're actually doing damage to our national security. leader pelosi has just lead us as rosa mentioned to visit with nato allies, our nato partners in italy, our nato partners in afghanistan and i felt like we should have brought brooms and mops to clean up the damage that donald trump is creating for those allies and those partners, clean up the mess, the national security mess that he is creating. in italy we had to reassure some of our closest partners in nato that we are not going abandon them, we are not going to turn our backs on them and we are not going to undermine them, in afghanistan we had to tell our

partners in afghanistan, the president of afghanistan, but also our military leaders that we were going to standby them, we are not going to undermine them as the republican presidential candidate has publicly suggested that he will do. it's easy to understand for the american people, number one, we are going to work with nato allies to combat terrorism around the world. number two, we are going to provide military the resource that is they need. number three, we are going increase funding for the fbi's couldn't terrorism activities and expand perimeter programs and number five we are going to take guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists, no fly no

buy. those are priorities that house republicans have completely turned their backs on. this has become an august of apology for the presidential candidate. it needs to be apology for the american people. with that, i will turn it over to one out of our members of our cordell. i want to thank leader pelosi for inviting us to be litigation particularly in europe and afghanistan and we want to thank the brave men and women that we had to meet in afghanistan.

they're really an inspiration showing us that we need to do more to protect the country. many of our republican colleagues seem to have forgotten what it means about military and instead of making choices about what the military has to accomplish, they have reduced support for troops, basic choice of level spending. they dish out un-ending criticism of the president's decisions and policies even when these policies actually work. you know, the decades of successful cooperation, they support a nominee who would pull out of nato and regularly insult the resolve of some of our most reliable partners.

we were very eager because we know that keeping our country safe is more than political pandering. 8400 troops will be staying in afghanistan longer than expected and announced that they will be given new authorities to support afghan partners out in the field as they pursue al-qaeda and taliban targets. to be honest, i was a bit skeptical about the decisions going into the trip. our country is war torn and our forces are stretched very thinly. we are engaged in the middle east and facing escalating threats in eastern europe and the south china sea. i wasn't sure it was the right move in the strategic environment but afters meeting with general nicholson, the american general who is the commander of nato in afghanistan

i think it's absolutely the right call to make. expanding our ability to defeat the taliban and al-qaeda, isil threats as well. we are preventing afghanistan from once again becomeing transhome of terrorism. our president has obligation to inform the american people of the burden they will have to bare in war and expectation for when the war will actually end. i've always called for this. the situations change fast as we know and the last thing we want is to leave a mission half finished allowing major threats to take hold once again. so i want to be clear for my republican colleagues, our partnerships with nato cannot be questioned. they stood was when we were attacked on 9/11.

our partners have been and will continue to be a critical part in our fight against terrorism. threats to abandon organizations, they empower russia and they weaken american interest and national interest security. that is not an opinion, that's a fact supported by our most senior officers. threats to abandon our allies are empty rhetoric. they are dangerous to anyone who fails to condemn this problem outright even our colleagues that know what is the right thing to do. so thank you and i yield back to leader pelosi. >> thank you very much, mr. carson. in addition to the distinguished mr. carson, mr. israel and congressman dolora on our trip we were joined by congressman terry, the ranking member on

foreign affairs elliot engel, a long-time member of the intelligence committee congressman and former ranking member on intelligence dutch. this is a heavily national security delegation, everyone was either from the intelligence, with intelligence background or mr. israel the defense subcommittee of appropriations and congresswoman dolora. so everyone there was in a position to gain knowledge and act upon it in the best possible way to the american people. now there are a couple of things that i want to make, when mr. carson was talking about the decision from going to 9500 troops to 8400, whatever the number, 9800 to 8400 and also to expand the authorities which he

did earlier this year, it was received very positively by our troops in afghanistan, by the leadership in afghanistan. we met with president gani and met with the chief executive offers and when the president took action was before meeting and had positive impact on our nato allies and more so at that meeting and so they also have chimed in with more resources for our actions in afghanistan. so our nato relationship is important in europe in the transatlantic partnership but in fighting isis and terrorism in began o -- afghanistan. i also want to make the point that congresswoman delora about

the issues relating to migration, poverty and the rest and i quoted then and i will quote it now pope paul the sixth, i had this -- if you want peace, work for justice and that's exactly what we are trying to do. working together to address the underlying causes of poverty, despair, territory for the recruitment of those who feel that despair. i was very proud of the delegation. again, we had some lively compensations which will serve us well here and that's about information and intelligence and knowledge and that's what is so frustrating here. we have evidence-base challenges, whether it's what's happening as mr. becerra

mentioned in flint, whether it's happening with opioids, whether it's happening with zika, whether it's happening with gun violence to name a few, evidence-based challenges and the reason our republican colleagues are not here is because they have not been in -- governance is not what they're here to do. they're antigovernance so why should i do anything and they're not moved by evidence even though they establish commission that say they want evidence-based and this and that, why? so they can ignore the evidence. so my question to the republican leadership in the house is, what better thing do you have to do than to look after the needs of the american people, whether it's children who will be affected for a lifetime but there are answers and solution ifs we move in more quickly.

what better thing you have to do than to meet the needs of the children of flint? and i thank my colleague from detroit, well, both of them congressman lawrence and kilby for their persistence on this. what better do you have to do to put resources for opioids? it doesn't work unless you put the resources there. we all agreed in large numbers. actually i would not have supported the bill if i thought there was never going to be any money coming with it. what better thing do you have to do that you gogo home for a month and a half after ignoring the president's request of months for funding for zika? is it because it's not in your district? it's in our country. it's in this world that we live in. what better thing do you have to do than giving us a vote on no

fly-no buy? 90% of american people support no fly no buy. it isn't like the public isn't watching of the inaction happening here. we are only halfway through this break. we can come back and act upon it. what are they going to do? they're going to do it in the appropriations process? maybe. by the way, they have thrown obstacles for zika funded. zika is a sexually -- if you're affected by zika it can be sexually transmitted. we had this discussion here. if we had funding for zika it cannot include contraception. i wonder how many of their homes -- i just wonder this a lot, how many of the families of our

republican colleagues are not practicing birth control. how come they don't have many more children? how come they don't have five or six children like i did. what is it that they don't understand sexually transmitted disease you use contraception. i grant them their position on many issues. but come on, come back, do the job, do the job and any time i see any one of republican colleague what was it that you accomplished during your break that was more important than the health and the well-being and security of the american people. i too am going to florida shortly after this meeting, go to orlando and meetings related to what happened in orlando two months ago, go to south florida to talk about zika. solutions are there.

the evidence and the science and the data lead us to a place where responsible governance for compromises and forgetting the job done are readily available. but the republicans are just saying no. any questions? >> leader pelosi, you were speaking about national security intelligence. there's a report out this morning about a russian cyber-attack affecting more than a hundred party officials and groups and possibly the democratic national association, have you been briefed on this and it is your understanding and it's broad? >> i know it's broad in terms of affecting the democratic congressional committee. i don't know that the governors -- i just know what affects us and that it is the russians. >> how concerned you are about this act and this information possibly coming out during this election? >> well, i don't have any concerns about the information

coming out, it's just wrong. but i think that we want to learn more -- i would like us to have been able to fully capture the hackers before they came public knowledge that they were hacking, nonetheless, i think it's very clear, i know for sure it is the russians. i said that at the convention two weeks ago and we are assessing the damage. i don't know about the other committees. i just know deeply about the democratic -- >> the aides could have been compromised? >> this is an electronic watergate, this is -- i think we have to recognize what is happening here.

the russians broke in, who did they give the information to, i don't know. but i do know that this is a watergate electronic break-in and anyone who would exploit for the purpose of embarrassment or something like that is an accomplice to that. >> you mentioned contraceptives, isn't planned parenthood -- [inaudible] >> what's planned parenthood, an organization addressing women's health. rosa, do you want to speak to this? >> i would point out why -- why when we know the difficulty that we have around these issues, why add to the difficulty that we are experiencing in puerto rico and, you know, i will quote pope francis on this issue, when he

said to the brazilians, use your conscious to determine whether or not to use contraception. as the leader pointed out, it can be a sexually transmitted virus. so -- but why add that kind of a writer to a piece of legislation that you know is going to hold it up and create the kind of decent that will keep it from going forward? there's an obstructionism here, that says why don't we want to fund a crisis in zika where we can help to save lives. it's mindless. >> i don't think that that's the only reason. the republicans could have -- could brought a bill forward that they have just said whatever we bring forward is not going to have contraception in it but they haven't brought anything forward and we have

offered so many compromises to them even to the point of going with the senate language of not all of the money just now because the money is urgently needed. so -- planned parenthood is not a reason, it's an excuse to do nothing. so make sure that you that in perspective. it's a silly excuse. >> madame leader, are we going to reach a point -- >> i would like to take questions -- >> that's my topic. >> yeah. yes, sir. >> on the trip and on national defense, how much discussion was there of russia's actions in ukraine and potential build-up of forces there and what you think the u.s. should do should they make some sort of attempt at trying to increase in ukraine, what should u.s. should do? >> the way we entered conversation, we were talking about nato and questions about

what's happening in the public domain and the u.s. on the subject of nato and what was the public support for -- sort of craziness that is going on. and then we talked about the eu and brexit and what that meant in italy because they say italy is next but that was not the impression we got in italy. it was a stronger eu, a for fulsome eu rather than leaving. from the standpoint of the ukraine, as to every trip that we have to any country or visiting dignitaries here we appreciate their holding to the sanctions. this is the most important message that we deliver. thank you for supporting the sanctions on the ongoing basis and that's the subject that we have with all of the elected,

leadership, speaker of the house -- the chamber of deputies, the president of the country and foreign minister, at every level we've talked about the sanctions. that's the manifestation of that issue that we addressed there because that related to the country that we were visiting. yes, ma'am. >> yeah. have you been notified by the fbi that you personally or accounts were targeted in the cyber-attack by the russians? >> i don't -- i just know that the dccc has been, i don't know that i have, i don't know. >> congressman israel said that he practically needed a broom and a mop to clean up after donald trump, i wonder if you have any reaction to his comments last night that president obama is the founder of isis and that hillary clinton was the cofounder of isis and does the administration ultimate

bare neglect responsibility? >> let me just talk about some comments. i don't spend a whole lot of time on politics as you know here. you are the one to bring it up, but the comment that was made by the republican nominee about the second amendment, it was clear that he didn't understand that the words of a presidential candidate, a nominee weigh a ton, there are many other references he could have said about getting out to vote, if you're antichoice, if you're opposed to a women's right to choose, you better get out -- you better take action because hillary clinton is going to point these judges and that would be relevant because the court does make decisions about choice. if you're -- if you are concerned about immigration, you better get out and vote because

this might make decision that is are more thoughtful in terms of comprehensive immigration reform. to choose the second amendment in the manner which he did perhaps unwittingly, but the double meaning that it had wittingly or not is very problematic. very problematic and scary. we don't know if he intended it or not, but if he didn't, words weigh a ton. for him to turn around what he did about the president and the secretary is so bizarre. it's reminicent of demagogues that want to be in the press no matter what they have to say. they make their verbal poopoo.

this is a tactic. here we are talking about it. the fact is that the invasion of iraq, the invasion in iraq under misrepresentations to the american people has more to inflamed the terrorist and any action you can name. so if he wants to say therefore because of this, let's just go right back to the misrepresentation given to the american people that we should go into iraq on a false pretense that everybody knows not to be true and we knew at the time not to be true. i was the senior democrat of intelligence, i said at the time, the intelligence does not support the threat, similar statement was made by senator bob graham, the chairman of the intelligence committee in the senate, they had the majority and yet they put out something

that still has uncertainty among certain people. look, they took polls of republicans, 72% aren't sure that the president is a citizen, come on. >> i would just say one thing. that is typical trumpian stupidity is what we have to call it. we will say this, while in afghanistan we learned that isis has an offshoot that was operating within afghanistan. we the afghan national army and nato partners have done an effective job to pushing them back, containing them to a small area, there's only one presidential candidate who is public i will saying i will saying that we ought to weaken our nato allies and turn away from allies, name allies we are fighting in afghanistan and effectively pushing them back and that is donald trump. so i don't mind his absurd statements, what concerns me are

disdangerous policies -- his dangerous policies. >> no matter how rudish mr. trump's statements are, he's smart in that there's a great piece on the cover of the current times that suggests a meltdown. it appears as if he knows he will not be the next president of the united states so he's trying to sabotage this thing because he's not used to losing. it's clear that trump doesn't have people around him or he hasn't had people around him who can correct him. when you're in political eyes you often have to either answer to the press and most importantly to constituents and he has not had those accountability so when he sees poll numbers declining and he's crying like a baby, someone who

is trying to sabotage himself to clear the way for president clinton. >> yes, ma'am. >> congresswoman dolora said the administration will have to reprogram more funding for zika, absence on congressional issue, have either one gotten information about how much other funding can be moved around and for how long? >> it's not a question that can be moved around. i don't want anybody to draw inference that they are spending money to fight isis. this money is needed where it was for the ebola and the rest. i don't want any inference to be drawn that this money is not necessary where it is and the fight against ebola and biomedical research, all of the other purposes of the department of health and human service.

i call it -- i used to be on the committee, the lamb committee because threferg is very -- everything is very valuable and the competition to the dollar is very key and that's why we have to go defense department to get resources for research because that's where the money is. the question is how we are going to restore the money. it's not nearly what they need to go forward. >> how much? >> well, we are waiting to hear. they are going to make a public announcement about it. but even with that as congresswoman delora said they

will be running out of money at the end of september in terms of cdc, initiative to work with the private sector for the development of vaccine, all of that, the money isn't there. why isn't it? why isn't it? because the republicans want to sit on the beach for six weeks? they want to avoid science evidence data and what is it that, you know, this reporter asked about planned parenthood. this isn't about planned parenthood as an excuse. but what is the reason that they have said five months after the president of the united states has pointed this out. is that that it's just not in their neighborhood. is it the same thing with sandi, they want us to pay for mid western national disasters but not when they're in new york, pennsylvania and connecticut, what is it that motivates them

or doesn't motivate them? do you want to address -- >> do i want to mention one point on zika funding, let no one be surprised about this and no one should make a mistake that this is not a flu that we haven't been able to fund zika treatment and prevention. many of you are aware that the social security administration has now announced that because of the republican funding levels that have been proposed, that they are going to have to close down offices n some cases for some weeks where every american who is either trying to collect benefit, apply for benefits has a hearing for disability insurance, all that will have to be put on hold because the social security administration doesn't have the resources to keep its doors open as a result

of the funding levels that republicans are proposing. it is now coincidental or accident that we find republicans unwilling to fund zika or the social security administration or any of a number of other subjects and it's unfortunate that this is their mode of operation. but make no mistake, they intend to start certain parts of our government and they intend to rob money from other parts of our government in the effort to try to shrink size of america. it's unfortunate those who pay are women and americans who apply for social security because our republican colleagues have decided that this is the way they want to run government. no one there should be surprise that had we have government shutdowns as well.

this is the way they intend to operate our government. no small business on main street would operate this way. there's no reason why the largest economy in the world should operate this way either. >> just very briefly, when we had a map of the potential spread of the zika virus, not just from those who had traveled but from local contraction months ago, we had that map and the republicans had that map. what is happening today in florida and in texas and in other places around the country is not a surprise. what is shameful is that republicans left town knowing that this is precisely what would happen this summer without the cdc getting $1.9 billion that they requested for vaccine development for additional research and for treatment.

and so it's just been irresponsible for republicans who have left town and not dealt with this crisis and the other public health crises that we talked about earlier. and i would say just in closing to speaker ryan, get back to washington and do your job, just do your job, doing nothing is not a form of governance. >> there's a point on the zika i want to make, republicans seem to be a level-riding bench, republicans from texas, from alabama, from all the states writing to the secretary saying spend the money you have. she has been spending the money, she has been spending the money and written back to them about how the money has been spent, not any of it is appropriated for this purpose but taken from other initiatives which must be

restored. so i want to commend the secretary because -- secretary burwell because she has handed it with great dignity and great respect for everyone's view saying how can we get the resources that we need, we cannot ignore the fact that zika exist. the money is being spent. every possible option is being exhausted. and now we are going into the national institute of health which is supposed to be a priority for us. >> on that issue just very quickly from the outset, the president made request for the -- $1.9 billion over and over again and our committee the republicans said that there wasn't enough data, there wasn't enough information about where money was being spent which was not true.

there was unbelievable detail as to where the resources were going to be. as a matter of fact, more detail than we had ever received on the cost of an iraq war or a accountability for resources spent in -- in iraq. and the leader just mentioned, chapter inverse, every line delineated where it's going to be spent, the money going to texas, the money going to states to be able to cope with the crisis. they continue to say that there's no communication, that is a lie, the data is there, take a look at it. on that subject, i just want to take this to the larger issue of budget. we had budget agreements last year. it was a compromise. it was in our view not what we

thought would be useful but it's a compromise and we agreed to it. it did not take into consideration that there would be a zika crisis, opioids crisis , what happened in flint happened. so all of these things would normally be emergency spending because the budget was bare bones as it was and so when something unusual happens like a natural disaster, then you emergency spending and that's what we anticipated would happen. that's what the president requested. instead they're saying, nothing -- five months later, february to now we have nothing and by the way, spend the money that we appropriated for other purposes

and by the way, anything we do in addition to that we are going to have to take out of the budget from last year which is our budget agreement. so this is -- it doesn't make sense. it doesn't add up and just to enlarge the issue further, you can see it played out in the presidential -- hillary clinton is proposing an economic package with job creation and reducing the deficit and bigger paychecks to the american people. middle class, middle class out. middle class, middle class economy. donald trump is revisiting the bush tax cuts which took us deeply into debt when president bush came into office. trickled down versus bubble up.

and by the way, the same trickled down people are saying, we want tax cuts for the rich because we think that's really important for our country even though those tax cuts do not produce jobs, they didn't and at the same time we want to reduce the deficit to take the food out of the mouths of babies, take pell grants, all the things that invest in the future. by the way if we have a national emergency, take it out of some good initiative that we are in a bipartisan way have agreed to in the past. but i don't understand why they don't understand. and there's an expression that i sometimes used with my colleague, you'll understand when you understand. when are they going to understand and -- that the money is being spent, that more money is needed. would it take a tragedy in their own district? one beautiful thing and i will

close with this is when we were in europe and talking to the president of italy and members were asking how come italy hasn't been affected by terrorist attack, the president said we are europeans, the attacks is to all europeans. the zika in the southern part of our country is in our country. and because it hasn't hit home in their district, it doesn't mean that it isn't hitting home for the american people. you know how i am about babies and this is about babies and i i just can't understand it. what are they doing? what better use of time do they have right now than to come back here and get the job done for the american people? mr. speaker, bring the congress back. honor our responsibilities to the american people. get the job done. thank you all.

>> well, before the house adjourn, the democratic members brought gun control and staged a sit-in for the day, you saw much of the coverage in our companion network c-span. you can see all of it in c-span.org. you heard democratic leaders complain about funding for zika. live coverage starts at 1:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. and white house coverage continues today with hillary clinton. she will be in michigan talking about the economy in response to donald trump's remarks on the same topic, live coverage at 1:15 p.m. eastern on c-span and

that will be followed by your phone calls and reaction. earlier today we spoke to a reporter that gave us a preview of the upcoming speech.e? >> where would she be and what should she be saying? >> in warren, michigan. we don't expect a whole lot new from her in terms of policy. it's more of a reframing of proposals she's put out there before, investing in jobs and infrastructure, debt-free college, trying to expand the number of workers who can share in their company's profits, proposals along those lines. i think you're probably going tl hear more or at least as much as donald trump's as you did about hillary clinton. she's really going to go after him as someone who is putting out trickled down economics and looking out for millionairesnd like himself with the proposals

he put forward in the week. >> what are some differences what donald trump said earlier at the detroit economic club and what hillary clinton will propose today? >> well, she's going to really go after one specific thing that he put out there which is a method of taxation for small businesses and other entities referred to as pass-through tax instead of paying a corporation tax, entities will be picked up. he wants to cut the rate for those who do things that way and clinton will say if you look at the various -- actually entities that make up the trump organization, most of them are constructed that way. so she'll argue that he's tryins

to help himself in this instance.st >> who is she targeting in her speech today? >> she is targeting the lower and middle class. getting back to your question about where she will be today, the county is no accident, it'sp a very blue-collar county. it swung back and forth in elections. if you look at the last eight presidential elections, democrats have won four, republicans have won four. so it's a swing county with potentially a swing state. >> our viewers want to watch,1: tune in at 1:00 p.m. eastern time out of warren, michigan will hillary clinton will be. you can watch c-span, listen to c-span radio or watch it at c-span.org. john wagner, thank you for your time. >> thanks for having me. >> a discussion on rice of the lone wolf terrorism. retired general and former

marine corps alfred gray and a 30-year veteran among the speakers. [inaudible conversations] >> as y'all know it's 12:00 o'clock when i say it's 12:00 o'clock, so it's time to get started. on behalf of our chairman and ceo of potomac institute we want to welcome you all to our potentially very exciting seminar today and we certainly have a superb group of analysts and we couldn't ask for a better type of group to talk to us today about some very, very tough challenges that we face throughout the globe and this business to have lone-wolf terrorist and all that kind of thing.

you've all read and heard about that. in the larger sense, the whole complex situation we face in global strategy today with the so-called conflicts and wars, if you will, below the nation-state -type of conflict that many of us are used to and allies have been pretty good at that. but this is a whole new kind of environmental below that level. some people call it the gray zone of conflict and the like and there's a lot of merit to that and a lot of thought behind that. others say we are in a new generation of warfare, they talk about that quite a bit. some see that as a framework for the future, others, something that we ought to do now so there's a lot of discussion and thought going into this challenge. it's not something that we are ignoring.

it's just dog-on hard to get your arms around it. it's difficult to determine what to do because in the united states of america in particular there's high level of moral level and thought process behind everything we do. it's not like some of the other people of the world, some of the other nations, some of the other radicals and all that kind of thing. and this was true in world war ii. for example, we would have difficulty dealing with the partisan-type operations and the guerrilla warfare and the like.

>> it's not relegated strictly terrorist activities or islamic type radicalism and all that. it is homegrown kind of think and grow up right out of the blue really. they can be radicalized for other regions beside religion. it's a tough challenge and we are again, i think fortunate to have an extraordinary experienced group of panelists today to talk about some of these issues, some of these challenges that we face and hopefully some of the potential solutions that are out there for us to think about. so with that, yonah, do you want

to take over, take charge? [inaudible] >> the arm is getting better. is still a little ways to go. >> i am ready to go to the ring. thank you very much, general, for your brief introduction. has always generals always have the first and last word so he will have another opportunity later on to shared some of his insights based on very long experience. i have ability as moderator to first recognize cosponsors of course, general gray mentioned specifically the potomac institute that is hosting this

and many other events. let me first recognize our professor don wallace over there to might end, the last, who is the director of the chairman of international law institute and the inter- university center for legal studies is the sponsor or cosponsor of this event. and, finally, also to mention the center for national security law of the university of virginia, school of law, our colleagues who are supporting our academic work for many years. let me first introduce our panel very briefly, because you have available the detailed bios of

each speaker, and in the interest of time i just will mention one or two i think titles and so on. obviously during the discussion we will have other opportunities to try to center some dialogue based on the work and experience. our first speaker will be writing to my left, captain dave martin. we are delighted to have you again to support our academic work. as some of you may know, he's assistant director of the maryland coordination and analysis center in frederick county, maryland, and he

contributed to our work on the rule of law enforcement to prevent terrorism. so he's going to provide some context, particularly in the u.s. environment, and the role of the police and law enforcement. the second sitting next to them is professor carol flynn. i think that is bringing a very rich experience as you can see from her bio, working with the cia for many years. i won't mention how many, but executive and clandestine operations and positions in africa, asia, latin america. and she's currently a professor

at georgetown university dealing with some of these issues, and also the private sector. will follow when her, lisa curtis, also has very extensive government, i think, experience. i will not go into details, it's up to you, but at any rate what is very important, she contributes now to the economic work at the center on asian issues, international security and foreign policy at the heritage foundation. next to her is mahbub hassan saleh, bangladeshi embassy, middle east media research institute but i would like to mention that his extensive

experience with the world bank and also focusing on the middle east and elsewhere. and then the last panelist to his left is professor been alexander, currently director of research program and professor school of law enforcement and justice administration at western illinois university. and i vividly recall that his first research and publications and maritime terrorism at the time was 10 years before 9/11. and i'm glad to see that he continues with this work. and as always, as i mentioned before, professor dawn wallace

will bring in a great deal on the rule of law, balancing security concerns and also privacy and the role of human rights and so on. i would like also to welcome the audience which includes academics, our colleagues from different universities, members of the diplomatic community in washington and many -- writer as speakers and so forth. and last but not least i would like to mention the students who are here, particularly those were completing their work for the summer. would you just stand up at least

so everybody can see who you are? we don't have time now to introduce each and every one, but both graduate and undergraduate, and they are the next generation of scholars. we are very proud of them your now let me just move o on, try to make some footnotes following general gray. in terms of context i will be very, very brief on this. first of all, i think all of us have to put into some perspective, meaning that the lone wolf threats that we're going to focus on today is clearly one of the many challenges and threats that we are facing all the way from organized crime to terrorism, the cyber threats and weapons of

mass destruction, et cetera, et cetera. the big tragedy, the rationale our discussion today, particularly because of the very dramatic daily menu of carnage that we have seen in the past few weeks, few months, all the way from orlando to nice to bangladesh, and the report yesterday about this horrible attack also in japan by a deranged crazy, if you will, individual, but it still had some ideological message, we can go into that. fundamentally, i think we have to keep in mind that the issues

that are being bandied today, you can see it academically, you can see it with law-enforcement and in the community, related to the lone wolf. because we are dealing with the question of myth and reality about that, and hopefully our panelists will provide some analytical clarity to the issue here for example, who are the lone wolves from the definitional and conceptual point of view? we can go into details. secondly, the argument that the lone wolf phenomenal threat is something you. obviously, we have to go into historical lessons and to understand. nothing is really new under the sun, including the lone wolf. we have to look at the

motivations, what triggers the so-called lone wolves? we have to look at their capacity and capability in terms of modus operandi, all the way from using stones and knives, to shooting. and what really concerns many analysts and many policymakers is the escalation, the possibility, not the probabili probability, that the lone wolf would utilize some of the so-called massive destruction weapons to weapon is themselves, for example, and the impact and implications nationally and globally. so hopefully we can have some recommendations of our analysts in terms of what are some of the

best practices to reduce the risk from the primitive to the terrorism. i have that long belief which i tried to share with analysts what we're going to cover. i'm not going to go in every issue, all the way from the historical lessons, definitions, characteristics, radicalization, intentions, capabilities, specifics, case studies what are some of the strategies to deal with the lone wolf and some conclusions and recommendations for consideration like governments in democracies. now, i would like to mention number three and number four, because when people talk about

the lone wolf, we have to talk about the ultimate weapon as general ridgeway over 60 years ago observed that man himself as long as human beings on the planet, we are going to have challenges all the way from organized crime or crime and terrorism and so forth. even the russian proverb right there is not complete. we talk about the wolves. we have to talk about the dragons. we have to talk about the snakes in the so-called garden of eden or the universe. so hopefully we can respond to the question, whether the worst is yet to come, and for example, if you follow what the terrorist

media or social media or propaganda is communicating on a daily basis, you will see that one of their next targets is the rio olympics. everyone is concerned about what might happen in terms of the attack or the impact in that olympics or elsewhere. and then, of course, can we survive that kind of attack? as democracies we have to look at the balance between the security concern, as i mentioned before, and human rights issues. it's a big menu. we cannot cover everything adequately, but it is the beginning of study and scholarship and not the end of it. with that, captain, you are the

first to share your views. you can come up here. >> good afternoon, everyone. first thing i would like to do is thank professor alexander and general gray are asking the return issue. i with you about the same time last year talking about the involvement of law enforcement in the fight against terrorism. when i looked at my fellow panel members, bios, before a candidate i decided it would be best for me to stick to stay of local topics as they are the experts on more of the international picture of those types of things. and i welcome any comments or questions you have. first just to explain. i am actually a deputy sheriff,

a capital and 10 captain in the support of nearly. i am a detailee to the state ste fusion center which is know donf maryland coordination and analysis center in baltimore. there are 78 fusion centers around the united states, and in these territories. what the fusion centers purpose is, as the reform after 9/11 was to coordinate between federal, state and local entities. i think post-9/11 one of the things we can all agree upon is there was a lack of information exchange amongst organizations who have pertinent information that could have helped to possibly prevent some attacks or at least to be a little hotter on the trail then we were that day. the fusion centers role is to create a routine and predictable path for the information flow.

generally in the u.s. we have two different types of fusion centers, either all crimes as we are in maryland, or all-hazards, this is like the western region of pennsylvania called region 13 is an all-hazards center. they deal with hazardous materials, whether related events as well as the threat picture. our main goal in the fusion centers and a national network of fusion centers is to share information nationally. because we have unlike some european countries in particular when they have a single police force that covers the entire nation, we have many different police forces and law enforcement agencies. in maryland we have 120 law enforcement agencies, and neighboring pennsylvania we have 1200 law enforcement agencies. you can imagine by the time the officer on the street sees or learned something, that it takes a little bit. you have to make sure the information is getting to the right place, and the fusion

centers on the process for getting information shared. looking at some past lessons, i'm going to focus on domestic instance strictly based on my experiences. i'll give a very quick definition of global terrorism. from a 2015 doj study, department of justice study, global terrorism is political violence perpetrated by individuals who act alone, who do not belong to an organized terrorist group or network, who act without the direct influence of a leader or hierarchy, and his tactics and methods are conceived and directed by the individual without any direct outside command or direction. so over the past years, the past few years you've started to hear, we morphed the terminology to try to account for what's happening. the latest thing that this definition doesn't account for is isil inspired terrorist

attacks. that's something where someone is acting as a lone wolf, not receiving any direction from an outside source but they are taking inspiration from things that they have seen or the call to take action. two of the attacks us go to touch on today, and i started writing my notes more than a week ago, so i did not include anything that's happened in the past week which we've all seen on the news. so the toothache and want but i thought were fairly significant for different reasons i'm the first one was eric rudolph who was the 1996 olympic park bomber from into. if you knew anything about eric rudolph you know that was not his first time as committing an act of that nature. he had been involved in numerous abortion clinic bombings across the south in the previous years and had not been identified as a

suspect yet. also one of the trademarks of eric rudolph was that he would set secondary devices. so the first device would go off, dropping the first responders such as myself and fire rescue and ems, and then an hour later the second device explodes in during the first responders. partof that was his view of these people are coming to help this organization that i am so terribly against. so that's why eric rudolph stood out to me. also the fact he was on the run for more than five years afterwards in the hills of north carolina, and ultimately was caught whenever he was going through the dumpster behind a supermarket or restaurant looking for some food for some sustenance and was run into by just a local rookie officer. the second incident i wanted to touch on very briefly with some

last year in december, the 2015 san bernardino, california, shootings. also lone wolf, yes, there were two people, to suspects but not receiving any outside direction. there was no master plan. what they did was they use firearms in order to commit their acts. they also had ied is that did not detonate, some at the scene, some in their vehicle and more found back at the residence in the searches that were conducted afterwards. but those are two pre-9/11, post 9/11 situations that we've seen right here in the u.s. the investigation of lone wolf attacks, if it's terrorism in the united states, the fbi has jurisdiction over the investigation of terrorism events. conversely, when someone dials 911, your call goes into a local

communications center. your first responders are people like me who work for local organizations who come out and we are the one to begin. we don't know what it is until we get there, even though the media is right on top of the sith because they hear the calls go out that we are being dispatched somewhere for such and such and they will call our front desk before we got a first person on the scene and see what's going on lex what's involved? they're trying to distort industry difficult to deal with that type of thing. it takes a while before you get on, have to get on the scene in till you able to determine what's going on. i think if i could see something about orlando just a few months ago, that was a case, they did not immediately say terrorism. we are in a great rush to put a label of terrorism on something because that's the buzzword, the thing that it's everybody stood up and watching the coverage and looking for that next report. we have to be careful to examine it closely enough to determine whether or not it is terrorism

related. so our federal partners that do international work, such as department of state, cia, have definitions that define terrorism as something, ask intended to influence the government. that's what it really takes a while, digging into you can determine if someone is trying to influence the government. what we are seeing now in the u.s. in particular is a bit of a paradigm shift where it's not necessarily trying to influence the government as much as to revenge against the government or revenge against other causes. anyway, when a federal investigation starts on a terrorism such as by the fbi, the first place they're going and looking is to the local agencies. the reason that is, because the people who commit these acts are the ones who live in our

communities. we are the ones at that contact with over th the years, we are e ones who might have some type of background information we can provide to get the investigation started. so future outlook on terrorism. some indicators of global terrorism, like i said in the international definition is not influencing government. what we are seeing in lone wolf attacks is many times there is personal motivation in which to do something. you also have to remember that terrorism in and of itself, acts of terrorism are a crime. if you break down to the local level, crimes consist of means, motive, and opportunity. anything that i've mentioned before whether it's the olympic park bombing or sample video shootings, you can go back and dig down and some are in the store you can find out that we know they haven't is because

they committed the act. you can find out what their motive is. they can come is a personal, politically motivated, and the opportunity existed because they took advantage of that. san bernardino was a holiday party at a government facility, and the suspect to work to their left, that a suspect and then when he returned with his wife, then the shooting started and the chaos erupted. as far as the future goes, the reason a lot of these things are able to take place is because they are committed by individuals, and individuals are much harder to detect and organizations. id and our federal partners have been doing an outstanding job in the past 15 years since 9/11 with detecting groups and organizations that are ramping up who appear to have the intent to commit some type of act, and

i would wager to say that there are many times that plots are disrupted that we do not hear the story on the backend about what happened. that's the reasons that security and the fact that perhaps they are on to other investigations with that information. so unfortunately, it takes these incidents to happen for us to learn from them. we do the best we do the best we can up front for trying to figure out how would we approach these things, what would we do. white until they haven't we really don't know that we have the best way. some of the things that it resulted not just on 9/11 but some of the things like hurricane katrina, hurricane rita was a national incident management system something we use at the local level. that our federal mandates for that. a national responseframework and some of the talk about today a national strategy for information sharing. at that is to say that with information that we gather at

the local level that then gets put into system where our federal partners who can do some of these investigations can see it and then likewise there's an information exchange that takes place, the federal partnership information about the people who live locally in our jurisdictions, and we worked together from the very beginning. so some of the things that we can do, if you've heard of the department of homeland security "see something, say something" campaign. it simple and that's the message i would like to deliver. please report it. that's the message we passed out to our citizens and our constituents in the field. lease let us know if you come across things that just seem out of the ordinary. our number and bernadine know, one of the neighbors who thought the shooters were suspicious but they did not, they chose not to report it because they didn't want to appear as though they were profiling them based on

their heritage. they didn't report it. you see the result, 14 dead, 17 wounded. they had ieds, more than 5000 rounds of ammunition that were not expanded. so it could have been even worse than it was a that's what we are looking for. as i mentioned we are currently seeing a shift in the causes, the motive of the attackers, the luo attackers, and a shift in the targets. like is that i chose not to focus on the past couple of weeks but again law enforcement has become one of the targets in the past few weeks. the vast majority of the public is good and does work with law enforcement realizing that here in this country we are essentially the first line of defense. when you call 911 it's one of us that shows up. so the things that general gray

and foreign services have dedicated their lives to overseas to keep the united states the best country in the world, those are the things we're trying to do at home. we can't do this alone. we depend on the public to be our eyes and ears, and especially in these recent times. that's it for my comments. thank you. [applause] >> first of all, thank you, professor alexander and general gray for inviting me here today. i am especially honored to be here, given the caliber of my fellow presenters, and they

should make a list of some of the attendees, and the caliber of those of you in the audience. so i'm grateful. thank you. grateful and honored. on the subject of global terrorism, there are a lot of different definitions of what is lone wolf. some people even hate the idea of calling them lone wolves because it sort of warfighters been. some say they should be lone dogs. of course, that's an insult to dogs i suppose, or lone offenders. but for the sake of since that where we are calling it for today, i'm going to call it lone wolf. definitions of lone wolves, again all over the map. last summer i led a task force at georgetown to look at this issue of who is a lone wolf and what is a lone wolf. the definition we came up with, not a legalistic definition but when we thought would help you develop a framework whereby you

could really analyze the different kinds of lone actor's. so we came up with the definition that is first and foremost delivered creation and exploitation of fear through violence or threat of violence. so in other words, they are terrorists they are terrorists or they have an ideology and they are trying, they have a political agenda that they are trying to further through fear of violence or actual acts of violence. second criteria we came up with was it's a single actor. this is different from a lot of definitions. a lot of people will say the san bernardino couple were lone wolves. as our nice brothers up in boston or lone wolves. and i suppose you could do that -- tsarnaev brothers -- often

has a different psychological profile, and the means by which you detect a person to is operating alone is different and more difficult. third criterion, pursues political change link to a formulated ideology. that relates to the first, are they terrorists? finally, no command and control for much of the support from an outside organization. so that's what we decided for the purposes of our study we would call a lone wolf. we've already talked about the difficulty to detect low levels are notoriously difficult to detect, particularly if the

operating by himself. the tools of intelligence and the tools of law enforcement really don't work very well if you've got an individual who is not talking to anybody else your because law enforcement and intelligence you sources, and source so what is being talked to, who's about this. if you've got an individual or a couple were just talking to themselves, it's a very, very hard to detect because we find out through sources, we find out through the communication. they are not committing with anybody, you are not going to do about it. just devilishly difficult to detect. so let's see, one of the other findings we have, you can't really use profiling as a detection tool. most of lone wolves are male. most of them, not all come historically over the years are

unmarried, not always, but quite often unmarried. they often had a brush or two with a lot in the past. sometimes minor, sometimes more serious. they often have issues of social isolation or they are not socially very competent. unfortunately, this particular profile fits a pretty large proportion of the general population. so it's not very helpful if you're trying to figure out if this particular individual is a lone wolf terrorist. let me talk a little bit about the trends we are seeing in the growth of, the last few weeks has been just dreadful, what's been going on in europe and in the united states in terms of these seeming lone wolf attacks, and i would say lone wolf pack attacks was not just a single

actor in some cases more than one. first of all there has been a growth in these lone wolf attacks over the last few decades. in the 1950s in this country, we have on record just a handful of attacks. maybe that's a matter of reporting but were not very many. about 30 to attacks during the 2000s, 32 more or less depending on how you count them. i don't have numbers for this next decade but is seemingly these attacks were going up a number. the barrier to entry is really, really low. and i'll have to do is get a knife or a hatchet, i can go over to home depot and buy it, and i won't raise any kind of suspicion by doing that. again, anybody can do this. the other interesting thing is i think as the european

authorities get better and better at preventing these potential for fighters from traveling to syria, a number of potential lone wolves in europe is swelling, is growing because they're just there stewing and not able to travel. the other interesting trend i think is that isis has become very quick to give attribution. i sort of wonder do they really know whether these guys were motivated by them, or do they have any sort of connection, or are they just quick to claim? i think more research and study and more information about, for instance, these recent attacks in europe will give us a better idea of that. another phenomenon we have all talked about the use of technology and social media to fuel the rise in these lone actors. so that come in terms of

radicalization that's a big trend. there are more of these folks self radicalizing comments of radicalizing more quickly. another i think really for me personally disturbing trend is the increasing use of social media during the attack itself. i mean, it sort of what i think of as itself a generation. they are taking salafis by themselves, taking views of themselves, tweeting out. they are communicating with 911 to we saw that with omar mateen and orlando. we saw it yesterday, dreadful attack where they took a video of the attack. again, these are some of the trends that are worth watching. in terms of the actual radicalization process, i won't go into all the details. there are people who are experts

at radicalization. historically, most terrorists get recruited basically to others. they have personal associations with someone who is involved. maybe their community is sympathetic. maybe they've got a relative or a brother, the tsarnaev brothers in boston, a good example of that. however, with lone wolves it's really self radicalization and it's more about having an ideology or finding an ideology that is attractive to the. personal grievance. often a colonel of personal grievance or projection of their anger about some sort of historical event or foreign intervention, or again perceived social injustice that leads to radicalization. so those are some of the trends i see. again, i'm afraid at this point

it's hard to be very optimistic about detecting them, given again the lack of communication with others. if there is one interesting statistic, if he gets back the "see something, say something." even for these lone wolves acting alone, more than 60% of them tell somebody else what they're going to do. there's a neighbor, a relative, a buddy. dylann roof a little over a year ago who waged a dreadful attack on the ame church in charleston who had a blog and this white supremacist ideology come he would drinking with a buddy a couple weeks before he was going to do it, had a little too much to drink i guess and told exactly what is going to do. and so often when this happens, the buddy dismisses it, he had a little too much to drink on these kind of like that.

what i think it goes back to that "see something, say something." another model we are looking at, another task force this summer that's looking more broadly at countering violent extremism. one of the models we are using to look at it is the public health model where you have primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. for instance, if it's a heart disease, primary prevention is a good diet, exercise, going to the doctor regularly, avoiding stress. secondary prevention is again maybe are starting to get high blood pressure so you are taking medication of some sort to lower your cholesterol. tertiary is where you got heart disease injured during bypass surgery or you're having a heart attack and they're treating you. again, with terrorism, if you look at it, a lot of the causes for radicalization are sort of the same causes that cause other social ills like drug abuse,

gang activity, crime. and the cures for those, the primary prevention again is opportunity, job training, public health, all those things that go into making strong and healthy communities. you will never be able to study and get a metric for the terrorist be prevented but those are a lot easier than getting them on the other end and catching them when they're getting ready to throw a bomb. so i will leave you with that. [applause] >> professor alexander, general gray, thank you very much for inviting me here today. it is certainly an honor to be

with such a distinguished group of panelists, and thank you all for coming out on a very hot summer day. so the more we learn about the isis foreign fighter phenomena, the more we uncover domestic terror plots right here in the u.s., the more we see there is no one path to radicalization. we see it as a very complex process and the motivations for engaging in this activity vary widely. the heritage foundation to a study in together many of our different regional analysts looking at the isis foreign fighter pipeline, looking at a global approach to dealing with this. what we found is that initially when people start looking at the fortified problem i hear and half ago, a lot of these people were motivated by the atrocities being committed by the pressure on assad regime against the

syrian people. now what we see are many people are motivated by religions, feeling it's their religious duty to either go fight for the caliphate in iraq or syria or commit terrorist acts in their home countries. so we've seen since 9/11, 90 plots have been uncovered in the u.s., 25 of those in just this last year and a half, and of those 25, 21 have had connections to isis. and this means either people were inspired by the isis ideology or in some cases they had contact with isis operatives, or even were directed by isis. so first i think we have to understand what contributes to the radicalization process. dr. alexander raised this in his opening remarks. but second we also have to better understand how isis

seeks, finds and nurtures people who have already started down the path of radicalization from their online activities your this brings me to the case of bangladesh. i see we have the bangladeshi dcm in the audience think about we talk more about it later, but let me just say a few words about that horrifying terrorist incident we saw on july 1 when five young bangladeshi men attacked a café in an upscale neighborhood in daca, the capital, and murdered 20 people mostly foreigners. they had asked people to recite the quran and when they could not, they were brutally tortured and stabbed to death. now, what has really surprised bangladeshis is that most of those involved in the attacks were actually from wealthy

families and their wicked expensive private education institutes. so this is something that i think is really shocked that bangladeshi nation into something also that we need to keep in mind. there was recently a raid two days ago on a local militant hideout. this is the jmb, and the government says they were behind the attacks but there also seems to be an isi isis connection to although the government denies any large-scale ice is present in bangladesh, it does look like these local militants had some kind of links to isis. we know this because there's also a hunt on for three bangladeshi ex-pats of canada, australia and japan. it looks like they may have been running recruitment and training pipeline for isis.

in a recent study from the national bureau of economic research actually backs up this idea that i this is not necessarily targeting those from the lower echelons of society, those from a lower socioeconomic strata. another study done by the eu found that out of 140 cases of so-called lone wolf terrorist attacks, actually only three of those were actual lone wolf. all of the others had some kind of contact with radical or extremist groups. we need to dig deeper into this loan will phenomena and explore pashtun global -- how is isis perhaps tapping into these long posts or do they start out as lone wolves but they have some contact with its virtual or face-to-face. i think look ae