>> great group on a monday morning. thank you for coming. we have a great event today. we have a few people still trickling in. before we start, i had a few quick comments. welcome to the center for strategic and international studies. my name is seth jones.

our work is available on the website. we have had recent publications on everything from has the law -- has the law activity -- hezbollah activity that will be published later this week. we dole other comments, not expect any emergencies, but just in case we have one, we have exits in the back at multiple locations. we also have them to the right of the stage. in general, the rendezvous point for emergencies is over at the national geographic museum, located right next door. if you have not been over to their current exhibits, they are fantastic as well. i am not being paid to say that, but there are some great

programs, including the titanic exhibit over there. we want to thank the people for all the work they have put into this, from max upfront to charlie valley, to make and and clayton, who are helping as well. the way we are going to do the human day, there are cards in front of your seat. , there are cards in front of your seat. after the initial discussion is over, we will move into a q and a from a p a. at any point, if you have questions, please write them down. andlie, do we have nick clayton in the room right now? mitch point to them when is done with his introductory remarks. i am happy to have a discussion

on the unmaking of jihadism, the current effort to combat violent extremism. we have the principal cofounder of the guardian group. practitioner come up based on his work at nypd and an author. , usedok on al qaeda plot it in my counterterrorism classes. thank you for educating my students along the way. jesse morton is the founder and codirector of parallel networks. we will get into a range of issues regarding extremism and counter extremism during this discussion and q&a portion. i will sit down and we will move the microphone. thanks.

>> what i would like to do is begin by turning to jesse. we have a really interesting background. i want to ask you if you could ask wayne the origins of revolution muslims. involvement and then your transition. then i want to go to mitch for the other side of this. for a chunk of years, you were sitting on the opposite side. was publicly the first organization in the u.s. unabashedly emoting al qaeda and jihadism on the streets. we were one of the first .rganizations we initiated in 2007. we were one of the first organizations to experiment with

the more social media one of the first organizations to experiment with the more social media oriented platforms such as facebook, twitter and we ran from 2007 until about 2011. i started the organization as an individual who is attending columbia university school of international public affairs, attempting to operate in two rounds. one under my birth name and one under my adopted islamic name, mohammed. we partnered with abdullah was a -- who was a jamaican cleric who is responsible for radicalizing people -- but was incarcerated ofbritain for communication threats and was transported to jamaica where he expressed an interest in inserting his jihadist perspective into the american culture. we formulated an organization against with three. when was an orthodox jew.

one was a jewish national and then we operated and came to new york and he gave us an interesting dynamic where we had a charismatic preacher with legitimacy, having been educated in saudi arabia. the political expertise to frame the narrative in a way that -- the jihadist narrative in a way that coincided to revolutionary politics, if you will, and then you have a colleague -- with a reputation online that was somewhat viral and able to push back have become what we called the clown. he was able to antagonize the right wing and the anti-islamic crowd to exploit that the point -- so that they could point to us as an organization that was calling for the implementation of short dialogue in the united -- of sharia law in the united states. it was a template that evolved over time we partnered with people like [inaudible] to formulate the very first english

language jihadist magazines and from 2007 until i was arrested , we set anca in 2011 template upon which jihadist propaganda had evolved since. not just the use of social media 2.0, but the development of that magazine and the private rooms that we see similar to the way isis uses telegrams today to conduct their one-on-one recruitment efforts et cetera. in 2011 after threatening the writers of south park between them is mohammed casablanca expecting to be indicted by the u.s. government. while i was there, i started a long process of the -- of de radicalization i lived in the beginning of the arab spring and was motivated by the fact that i was teaching people english teaching economics at a local university in english equivocating with my students about what they wanted to see going forward in morocco.

i was enthralled by the fact that they were committed to liberal principles that still had an islamic identity and they sort of eradicated these ideas that i had about the hypocrisy from among the modern muslim community and opened up to recognizing that what people in the middle east, particularly in or -- wereted, things i wanted and to for -- and took for granted. osama bin laden placed a piece of propaganda is trying to rebrand al qaeda and essentially he had a talk about global warming which is a try to betray him as more of a progressive intellectual as opposed to a person who is calling the plea -- calling simply for violence and terrorism. that faux pas because it was irrational and did not make sense. that's what i reckon as semi views of the man who was held to be 8 feet tall had come down to a more realistic understanding of what he represented if this was someone responsible for making policy. it was absurd.

i was arrested for weeks after -- three weeks after he was killed and set for extradition back to the states and in that -- back to the states. in that time i interacted for five months in moroccan prison with one of their chief charismatic preachers responsible for radicalizing those that were not to conduct attacks in casablanca. he challenged my ideology because he himself changed. i found that interesting. i was -- he was scared about what i was facing and felt it was difficult because i was starting to change before my rest. -- my arrest. u.s. government came on a private plane to find a home where i found out i was facing life imprisonment and found out that the united states had overtime was not [inaudible] when they return me to -- returned me to alexandria, virginia, across the bridge was -- i was held in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day . there was a guard that felt sultry confinement was rather oppressive and she would take me

four hours a day for ten hour shifts to the law library which has this library and that's where i read in sight with an enlightenment books and thomas paine and john locke and others , russo, which played a significant role in my going back to the cell for the day she was at work and rereading the koran and the islamic texts through a more post-enlightenment perspective. when i took the plea that kept me up to ten years it at sentencing i had to undergo a debriefing process and developed -- process with the fbi and i developed a very interesting relationship with a female fbi agent that showed me empathy, but also at the same time, would , advocate for me to be an asset to someone who could help the government going forward. as time went forward and i traveled to syria and track and -- tracked and monitor them and make talked about [inaudible]

obama have released the chief strategic implementation plans and i was giving input on that. throughout all my interactions with the fbi they were not waging war against islam they were primarily concerned with stopping acts of terrorism in -- and identifying those that may go on to commit violence. ultimately, i was originally sentenced to 11.5 years and served almost four years of that before the judge reduced my sentence due to my cooperation. i was released in march of 2015. where i continued to operate as an informant and in some -- and analyst in some capacity with the fbi and the public is america's first former jihadist but recognized that as time went on i have not actually done the work of deradicalization because i refuted the ideology and they never address the issues that ultimately facilitated my entrance into radicalism in the -- radicalization in the first place. i've been sober for over year -- over one year and i'm doing

work on myself but also trying to understand and taking a different perspective with regard to areas such as intervention and counter messaging, etc.. contributionking a for some ofmends the harm i caused under my former self. >> great. mitch, over to you. between 2006-2011 from the nypd perspective working directly against jesse so you talk about -- so could you talk about what he outlined from your perspective sitting on the other side. jesse: -- seth: to some degree i was responsible for having jesse arrested and imprisoned. -- to some degree i was

responsible for having jesse arrested and imprisoned. we will start their backpack my role at nypd instructor of intelligence analysis and i oversaw civilian analysts and detectives who were running investigations in new york city and during that period in 2006 or 2011 probably the most complicated and challenging investigation was that of revolution muslim and that specifically of jesse morgan. from 2006-2011 think of it as catch me if you can with jesse as leonardo dicaprio. i was trying to get in. -- i was trying to catch him. in the uk there's a group called [inaudible] and speaking with the uk security services depending on the time that you are speaking there with a 25-30% of uk citizens were gone on to join al qaeda or some other jihadist organization spent some -- spent at least sometime in [inaudible]. we understood that in new york city we had a version of that. first, the society and then jesse's more extreme

splinter organization revolution muslim and we were highly concerned about that. at nypd we were fortunately able to position an undercover nypd officer in revolution muslim and, in fact, as the it administrator. he knew what jesse was having for breakfast most days. however, it was difficult because jesse was a savvy operator. he knew where the line was as -- in terms of first amendment, and he was quite circumspect in accessing it. nevertheless, he was the type -- the chief ideologue or for revolution muslim and one of the things we outlined was that there are 15 spots around the world that you can trace individuals who purchase paid in -- who participated in that then being followers or interacting with revolution muslim. it was a wide stance. you have two individual carlos almonte and two individuals from new jersey were radicalized and

wanted to join. you have anotheris us citizen from brooklyn who traveled to pakistan and nypd interacted with the ambassador to have him to the ground at islamabad and -- and sent back to the us. his intention was to join al qaeda. your plots in the uk and plot to attack the london stock exchange over christmas in 2009. the stabbing of a uk parliamentarian by a woman who attacked him for his support of the iraq war. you are at a plot against the new york city subway following the instruction in inspire magazine how to make a bomb in the kitchen of your boss. mom's kitchen.

these are potentially deadly plots and all trace the origin back to revolution muslim. your plot in boston wanted to use a drone to attack the pentagon. frankly, even if you look at inspire magazine, the first issue of it, had a list of enemies and the primary author of the magazine had been a part of revolution muslim and in that magazine he listed enemies off of al qaeda was between me and met's which featured protection for my two sons and , wife for a few different times by the nypd. we mentioned in opposition to each other and it was very much the case. fast forward last summer the attack on the london bridge where it turns out one of the primary attackers was, in fact, a member of this group. the story of nypd fighting this group has not been talked about and i knew jesse had been recently released from prison so i reached out to jesse and said let's tell the story about nypd and how the different

techniques that revolutionizing pioneered the internet, social media interactions online, things are being adopted by isis. frankly, as isis moves into the stage of a particular palisade there are techniques that isis has adopted that were pioneered by revolution muslim and we need to look at more closely it will figure out how to adequately fight the virtual caliphate. -- virtual palisade. the partnership kicks off and we created this nonprofit organization called parallel networks. the idea is to do three things. use formers to do ct research and number two, yes these -- use these formers for targeted interventions and a pre- criminal way so that 15, 16 -year-olds who have not crossed the line to criminality but are , spending time on isis websites and go down that road and third,

interact with people gone at -- who have gone out of prison and need to rehabilitate but have a background and we know there are about a hundred people will be getting out of prison in the next five years in the us and to date there is no less -- there is no foreign laws program to help rehabilitate those people. that's a quick summary of my part on this side of where we are now. >> before going to jesse we have a couple of questions in the back to mitch. i wanted to remind anybody they have cards and if they could pass them down, charlie over here and nick over here, it can -- they can pick them up. again, feel free as we talk to write down questions and they will pick them up and bring them to the stage. we will read as many as we can at last part of the q&a. >> two questions for you jesse, can you talk about your concept of the virtual caliphate and how it differed or is similar to the

way the islamic state when it began in 2014 picked up pace in 2016, 17 and even now 18 -- how it differed or was similar? let me start with that and then i have a follow-up. jesse: i think it's important to pay attention to the historical evolution of online propaganda efforts to recruit. what we've seen is the development largely similar to the [inaudible] ability of people that in the beginning was a people living in espousing an ideology that was generalized but when they traveled to yemen and the leader joined him, we had the first case of propaganda western that had a western version of al qaeda's narrative that appealed in many ways in much stronger to the stuff coming out of the middle east.

there were not able to see this is the ideology you should adhere to. they were there to show you how to act on it. the fundamentally fascinating things for me working as an informant in prison, and creating a narrative of an individual, prominent individual, is one of my students who traveled to syria in the beginning of the virtual caliphate is coming to the awareness that isis propaganda when it comes to westerners is a -- targeting westerners is a western import. a lot of the individuals affiliated with [inaudible] and had heavy understanding of how to make the message appealable to those in the west embedded themselves and rocca were living -- in rocca were living in a safe house altogether where they -- all together where they were concocting ways to utilize the internet, twitter particularly in the beginning and since navigated and adjusted the way -- the platforms in a way that we use to and they take us down on youtube and we haven't another channel up and running in the same day and we could take down our domain name but we

have another running and that's the cat and mouse that the virtual caliphate has played played. now we have this idea of a virtual plot or virtual entrepreneur, someone who does not understand the eye theology -- the ideology may have compromised and migrated there and able to articulate in english the views but also to recruit and migrate the forms in the same way we use up program for direct messaging applications where we were able a broad lecture -- we were able to give a broad lecture, appeal we couldn't tell them how to do it. we could encourage them but disseminate more understanding to facilitate projection upon the ideas. now we are faced with that difficulty and it is rather effective. this is the problem going forward. they will sustain without

having any territorial control, it is important to recognize the reason they joined the caliphate is there was a scene set in the minds and hearts of people that the primary obligation of muslims in the west or anywhere in the world was to work for the caliphate. even if you destroy the caliphate that legacy they established and the desire to return and the ability to refer, but appeal. isis is trying to sustain itself among them by migrating to different platforms to promote the ideals for a safe haven. at the same time we see a new phenomenon of competition that has led through the ultimate barbarity into a post i see world through the social movement for radical side

effects where their brand was originally considered delegitimized and now the violence promoted by al qaeda is moderate in comparison to isis. you have to think ahead, not just about the virtual caliphate but a virtual caliphate with access online to different organizations and probably splinters that branch off. we see arguments among isis followers with regard to who they can kill regarding who is a non-muslim. these things mutate. an important thing in the paper mitch and i wrote, the splinter is important to pay attention to, these things metastasize into more and more's acting of violence but at the same time stretching to the point you have groups in syria which have 30,000 people by most estimates in the organization, al qaeda,

which introduces immigration, now has 1000 followers and filled its first attack and they disseminate the ideology there. the rise affiliated with territorial safe haven. the lag time where the territory is dismantled, they will sustain themselves with the idea but we have an opportunity particularly for the western audience in the united states being too legitimate size themselves to get to the heart of how to refute that idea. >> reporter: one question if i could ask you first, there are a number that pick up on what you said. policymakers argued recently the islamic state has been crushed, that it has been eradicated. a number of americans. it has been a while, many have assessed a notable jihadist

attack on american soil, different from the british experience, the french experience of the last year or two, britain had a number of attacks in manchester, how would you respond to this notion that the islamic state or other groups have been either crushed or eradicated and what is your sense about the threat overseas today? >> i suggest we have been here before. i was arrested in may, we started to debate whether the war unfair was winding down and whether it was over. that leads to an awareness it is not about organizations. the jihadist entity runs on ideology but it is a movement bound together by similar principles some of which people

can differ on and you have a competition of market-based ideas for a competition but in regard to the threat to the homeland what is sitting in for jihadist organizations that have better capability to direct attacks, we went from a phase of command counterterrorism to one of leaderless resistance my organization helps facilitate. going back to the command situation where the internet or virtual caliphate makes that possible, there's a realization in the jihadist community setting in with regard to an attack and al qaeda and isis are aware in order to retain the mantle of jihad, it outdoes or rivals 9/11. the primary concern with regard to the threat, whether or not there is capacity in the united states, something i'm continuing to argue for to turn internal to the middle east, to

prioritize ahead of this and look at and adjust the possibility, important to recognize the first entity that was attacked once we announce the coalition against isis was not the isis target but and al qaeda aligned organization operating inside syria in syria that had an ongoing attack. they had a plan to conduct an attack in its last stages that would have rivaled casualties as they saw it. it was important to pay attention to these fluid dynamics that evolved and the capacity to facilitate, you don't have to travel to afghanistan or pakistan, now you can literally just do it from the decrypting platform. >> isis eradicated, your sense of a threat to the homeland.

>> i do think we have been here before. government officials talked about the demise of al qaeda after osama bin laden was taken off the battlefield. there was an ab after that but ultimately, after the 2012-14 period when isis stormed onto the stage in a rack and to some degree that is where we are. the ideology, what makes the situation different from the first ad in 2012 is the number of european foreign fighters

who returned to europe in the uk and france and germany, i was just in austria, hotbed of isis terrorism, 337 austrians went to syria and iraq and a certain percentage came back, we are most likely to see a revival in europe with foreign fighters who have returned may be inspiring some individuals who were radicalized. in the us the targets may be us targets overseas and domestic targets. the fact that we have many who have traveled overseas to isis and far fewer have returned, a certain measure of protection but virtual plotters and individuals who were radicalized on the left looking to do something can be

manipulated and operationalized overseas, those are the things i am most concerned about and it is not clearly isis. al qaeda used its time to regenerate itself and they merged with local entities and it is not off the table. >> something you wrote in the conclusion of revolution to the islamic state. most of the plots linked were thwarted with the nypd, to the heart of the islamic fingers society, and go on to say increased use of digital undercover officers.

what is your general sense in combating, countering on us law enforcement intelligence side, some of the lessons you have seen. >> it comes down to human intelligence, having the right sources placed in the right locations. that is an evolving phenomenon over time. physical locations for many years looking at greater new york state and taking lessons from overseas that might have been placed where there was a -- moved to a bookstore and a café and a barbershop and locations where you have an

undercover -- people radicalizing. being online turned out to be the place you are most likely to encounter people using a virtual safe haven. and a telegram channel. the only way you can have some chance of detecting something is involving human assets where ability to interact in a way that is believable online and in new york, police officers, very diverse from the country of origin perspective, people postured in farsi and arabic and on those websites and on those channels, so they could look like thew. side hwy.

and it wasn't detected. that is why one of our conclusions was more effort, more resources devoted to developing skilled operators in that space. >> i will take the opportunity to read a couple questions. i will start with the first one directed at you and a few other questions i will ask in a little bit. the first from one of the audience members, does the network have plans to perform prison the radicalization programming in the us or civil society limited to pre-post-incarceration. what is your involvement? what is the network's involvement in prison

radicalization? >> a bunch of fanfare recently with 100 individuals at home, we are looking into criticism, communication with people locked up for isis and al qaeda related cases that are set for release in a couple years in that timeframe. also looking at reentry and reintegration that has already come home, to identify mechanisms through which you can provide programming. one of the things we will be discussing going forward is this phenomenon. the problem when you look at models that might apply to the united states, it is incredibly unique in comparison to others. we have vast terrain, 500 people convicted and imprisoned, 400 people in prison. concocting a program that would be mandatory would be

incredibly problematic. some things need to be considered like communication management, a model utilized early on to isolate prisoners that you create an incubator and it only takes one person to spoil the pool. >> you are talking -- >> bureau of prisons. you can list innumerable cases not just in western society but here at home. my codefendant zachary chester was in communication management and able to publish an article about the day -- to the communication management team, he left prison and went on to become one of the primary propagandists on behalf of syria in the united states but when he was in communication management he himself published an article how people in the communication community asked him to teach classes. it was about making a mandatory program with all these terrorism related offenders on the same block, major complications because it only takes one person with charismatic appeal and ideology

to make sure those individuals do not change their beliefs. we are looking inside the format, particular concentration, developing expertise with reintegration and reentry. that would require government partnership. there is massive complications with that too, push back, and number 2, there is this intuitive belief that if you partner with moderate a moms you can change ideas. when you look at actual outcome of interaction of moderate in moms to this interpretation of islam you run into the question whether that can be counterproductive so you see a situation in australia where the moderates were relegated by the australian government to provide reentry services that continued upon release.

the minute an individual hijacked a prostitute and went down and killed the receptionist and went on to the streets to engage in a shootout with police, three days later the moderate imnm distance themselves. we don't have mechanisms for measuring outcomes can become problematic where you violate the first principle of intervention. we are taking a deep dive into that phenomenon but we want to not just criticize the government for not having anything in place but to provide a realistic alternative that can be tested and developed. parallel networks would like to lead in that or partnering with other organizations. >> if i could take a step back and ask you to outline your thoughts on us government counter violent extremism

projects programs more broadly, government agencies including homeland security, a fair amount of money on programs in communities. what is your sense about how effective they have been or not, the key challenges with us efforts? we know overseas the british spent a fair amount of resources, a new program the british have introduced for individuals that just left prison, the french have devoted increasing amounts of resources on the prevent side. what is your sense of here? how effective those efforts have been in the challenges. >> i think we looked at how the us approached this back to the obama administration and their assessment something needed to

be done. it is a softer effort. a lot of it was start and stop, interest and how to move forward after the attacks, the boston marathon, rejuvenated interest in the us, and three pilot programs put in place in boston, los angeles and minneapolis. what was determined was who should be in the lead, the us attorney's office in those jurisdictions should have a lead on the efforts. the us attorney's office made a good-faith effort to organize different people from the community to be involved in these efforts but one of the biggest -- the us federal government, in that space.

radicalization is a local phenomenon and ringing the us government from the federal government on down, tends to not have any legitimacy dealing with people in the field. it has to be an organic local effort to combat extremism. and the other thing they having complication, religion is a topic the you can't touch. the us government is willing to engage in a political debate for us foreign policy, and a mobilizing factor for individuals at a disadvantage in trying to push people off the path. it seems like local organizations if you look at the gaming world, former gang members have taken them and said you go back to the

community, and talk about your experience. and a 15 or 16-year-old version of your self up and down that road. i know the ideology, it is a dead end. and us governments, and to provide some angel funding. and it is not coming from the us government. and create some standards they have to adhere to. and the us government top-down pushing the initiatives. >> the role of women. what role do you find women playing in these organizations.

and organizers from both radicalization standpoint, the role of women as well as counter violent extremism, one of the challenges from a number of standpoints, many have not returned to europe, and they haven't are. >> they are a cornerstone. they would administer chat rooms for a number of reasons. and they had an enormous amount of time. they were housewives in the

islamic tradition. a woman who practices does not go out and work in a day, they take care of the kids. who has more time to be on twitter? they can understand the ideology and disseminate it and it can be powerful because what we used to do is make it look like this is a woman. a woman sacrificing herself and her time for the sake of this movement. what are you doing? and incredibly shameful approach to facilitating the progression to violent extremism. the appeal to the movement, it is powerful because it is a coherent and comprehensive worldview that includes everything down to how you practice and includes every aspect of life and pits every aspect of fundamentalist muslim's life against norms and standards in the west. and there are standards of western feminism, what a

powerful narrative it is and online application and cover my face because this is feminism from an islamic standpoint. countering violent extremism, they are starting more and more on the international effort. for dissenting voices, women have a serious role to play with regard to cases, a lot of times may be they were not coerced into participation and a lot of times it is obviously in their interests, having experienced that and to detail what life was like under the islamic state and document that and show the effect on the children and show the impact that it has there is serious trauma and things we face with the controller.

the narrative to prove that it is sustainable and legitimate, the idea, the fact they prepared an entire generation of thousands and thousands and thousands of kids prepped ideologically and operationally to carry this to the next generation which makes it seem even though we lost territory we continue. the challenging that narrative is incredibly important showing the trauma of the children coming back but not just the trauma but the fact western society can deal with this in a nonpunitive way. these women need to be given opportunities to heal and in particular cases where the assessment is conducted and seems they can become reintegrated effectively, the narrative that is credible and at the same time the level of prevention can be most valuable.

>> question from the audience and let me preface by saying one of the new developments in the recent british counterterrorism strategy that came out in june called the contest includes concerns about the rising threat from extreme right-wing groups in particular. the murder of a member of parliament. one member of the audience asks essentially about the role and danger and threat and reaction to extreme right-wing groups in the us. what is your sense of the threat from the extreme right? how do we balance, as we talk

about extremism, whatever form, whether it is ethnic, left-wing, extreme right-wing, religious in this case, how do we balance it? >> when the cbe debate was kicking off in the us, it is such a loaded topic, generally when you are talking about al qaeda followers, they tend to come from muslim background because the ideology is trying to activate that part of their identity but if you have a debate in the us, it has to be broadened, all these other types of extremism, right-wing, left-wing and ideologically driven, and they are not that different from the process of turning to violence even though they come from different ideological roots. i would put gang violence in a different place because there is no ideology to it, criminal

driven violence. to protect the discussion we have to honor the discussion to cover all of these. and from the personal perspective focusing on the islamist type extremism but we are having discussions, the processes get into the extremism, it is likely the processes could bring people back. to factor that in is a design program. as much as you want to see some groups focus on al qaeda you also want to see anti-neo-nazi groups, there are a couple conversations, and it is timely. and the charlottesville

anniversary to see one person in particular who is a ringleader see if you can pool it back and bring them into the debate forum. >> comment to the questions, they use former islamist intervention experts or do you work or plan at some point to work with neo-nazi white supremacist, several people ask if you can hold onto that the biggest factor or factors in your radicalization process, social, economic or other things, and a right-wing question, to your own background. >> to be very brief, i feel it is important to address right-wing extremism because in

many ways it was responsible for giving them what they need to promote the anti-islamic view, that the muslims in america were attempting by force. we deliberately antagonize them before there was a massive rally of anti-islamic sentiment and play off of that to the point we introduce a symbiotic relationship between the two. at this point the jihadists need the far right of the far right need the jihadists in countries like britain. understanding how to dismantle that is important and we primarily have to take things one step at a time. we are a startup. we have ongoing conversations with former far right extremists and a good relationship with -- i retain a good relationship with other people affiliated with the organizations. life after hate is a good example of reformers on the other side but i find fascinating that my credibility as a former jihadist allows me

to make breakthroughs not just with people on the far right but if i reach out, i won't mention specifically, they are engaged in primary items. i know you have never gotten an email like this from a former jihadist but i see a lot of myself in you and would like to engage in this dialogue. we have a point we are approaching being able to get one of the key leaders of that movement ready to go public and to say i make a commitment to nonviolence. doesn't mean we view all their perspectives but it opens an avenue for dialogue eradicating the polarization, the most catastrophic and self sabotaging reality we see today is the polarization of our society on the left and right, protests and counter protests give them the fodder they need to say the recourse of dialogue does not work for us any longer. >> the attack was done by someone of the extreme right

against an individual outside london. also we saw a number of arrests in france for individuals committed not to attacks against muslims per se but viewed as radical muslims so there have been efforts in a number of countries where the two issues are intertwined and feed off of each other including radicalization. talk about your own, your own radicalization process, what were the factors that contributed to it. you talk a little bit earlier about the process. >> the opposite principles, the antithetical principles were the primaries with regard to the radicalization and my own radicalization. i certainly have a traumatic upbringing when i was 16, not

an excuse for becoming what i became. it opens me up to the model, i became a seeker searching for something i latched onto. if i was born 30 years earlier, the hammer and sickle, i was looking for something because i had grown to resent my society because i felt society had been unfair to me and also i had something to contribute to the world and was denied an opportunity. i come from poor working class, i experience the a grievance. i watched factories disappearing globalization. i watched educational opportunities decrease with regard to being able to go to community college and i know the impact that had. i watched it, i grew up around it. to search for radical ideology, for reasons of resentment against my own people and by

leftist leanings i chose more revolutionary, in the background, those are the variables that were associated. we look at areas of conflict, to address with regards to that. there is an intervention i conducted where a lot of times you assume this is a purely rational ideological choice and every time you conduct an intervention you try to look at why a person shows that ideology and you will always find in the background, some life events or life circumstance, you can get back to the root and get a person to realize they have chosen the ideology because it was an outward projection of their own frustration and their own pain, and alternative ideology that did not appeal to them for a particular reason. you have to get to the root by addressing ideology and going

backwards and say there's no need to talk about ideology that is so friendly. let's talk about your life. the ideology is a conduit that facilitates progression to violent extremism but the background baggage at the level of intervention that is most important. >> there's a question about people in the room watching online, the public in general. how can the greater populace of law enforcement for example combat online radicalization? is the support of, quote, moderate secular voices useful? what role do we have if any in countering violence? >> if there is a role it is a role that encourages debate and discussion.

as we heard, one of the pathways turning to violence was feeling that your views couldn't be heard, couldn't be engaged, whether it is on foreign-policy or other subject matter, these issues out in the open, forms for discussing them, potentially a way to defend their point of view, not an echo chamber. everyone has the same viewpoint, they might have to consider some other viewpoints and factor that in. will that prevent someone going down this road? i don't know. there are so many factors that determine it. the discussion on faith, on twitter, it is so polarized, in terms of intensity, if there's some type of debate they are

less likely to antagonize people, it is a societal issue much more than cts. >> last question to both of you gets into the issue of freedom of speech and radicalization online. to you and mitch, from one of you, how do you limit the effects of radicalizing online while retaining freedom of speech. and silicon valley terms had to struggle with as well. why don't we start with you? >> difficult question but finding the right balance. because of our first amendment, it is understandable.

i walked up to the line and they were not able to do much at all about it. but we default into social media companies. >> explain when you walked -- you say you walked up the line. what does that mean for you? >> we would press the issue. we create controversy like the most viral thing we did was threatened -- because my code defendant did not have a proper understanding of the first amendment. one of the first things i did when we got popular in the jihadist movement was review case law on first amendment extensively so i knew what i can say and what i couldn't say and what wasn't considered a threat. that is a manipulation of the first amendment and being promoted by people right now. we have a rally for civil rights and it is quoted in their own organizing document,

the effort to gain the system. you can game the first amendment to some degree and there is pressure on social media companies because these are the platforms on which it occurs in the way you tweak terms of service agreements. and the government has pushed, difficult to understand, they are all interconnected, 6 ° of separation, it is minimized now. we are interconnected by four steps. and they are clustered. and free expression to engage in dialogue. and the echo chamber, and terms

of service, to remove content it is understandable. i'm not sure it doesn't make it worse. it has to be thought of holistic lee where you take down content. migration and other phenomena that work around it will sustain the discourse. how do you promote engagement and dialogue? rather than mission these people, not give them a platform or an opportunity to speak, engage them. give them an opportunity to speak. that way you can push back against them. create a forum like this where one thing we plan on doing is publicizing the fact we engage with the far right and being able to put them on stage and allow them to xmas views no matter how hard they may be and given an audience like you an opportunity to push back but we suggest competitiveness and rational reputation is why counter messaging doesn't work because people are emotional.

they don't think like that. we are trying to create an alternative method, from alternative messaging to induce a new term so you can message all you want, practice what you preach, have an alternative system to pull people away from that is built on antithetical ideas. nothing will work. we need to preserve free-speech forcing dialogue with those we disagree with rather than just those we disagree with the was all of us tend to do whether we recognize it or not. >> jesse dancing on the line of the first amendment, to be indicted and a colleague, individual from the area. george mason, threatened matt stone specifically online, specifically what you do with

van gogh who was assassinated and split by al qaeda acolytes. this is who you should do it to and what you should do. and enterprising eastern district of virginia found the legal route to prosecute that. otherwise jesse and his group have been be devils, the southern district of new york and eastern district, the attorney's office, the first amendment line is cutting it too close. i tend to think we see how mark locker berg was successful the last 72 hours on the holocaust issue in terms of service and the types of threats we are talking about.

they have gone -- they have gone to silicon valley to push for content to be taken down. we are seeing more of that now but more needs to be done and that is one of the points as well, terms of service, the most elegant way to do it. a platform to determine the rules by which everybody plays. >> thank you for sticking with us. i'm going to ask you to join me in thanking jesse morton and mitchell silber for discussing radicalization, countering violent extremism, the u.s. constitution, there are a few things we did not touch on here. join me in thanking both of them. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> wednesday on the c-span networks the house returned live at 10:00 on c-span. at noon they consider four suspension building including resolution condemning violence perpetrated by nicaragua and they take up a bill on health savings accounts. on c-span2 the senate continues work on a federal spending package to fund interior and environment, financial services, transportation, housing and urban development and the agriculture department and related agencies. on c-span3 scott gottlieb

testifies before a house subcommittee. in the afternoon secretary of state mike pompeo briefs the senate foreign relations committee on donald trump's meetings with the leaders of russia and north korea live at 3:00 eastern. join washington journal friday live in baltimore, maryland as we spotlight the opioid epidemic, we look at how city and state agencies work with city residents who are addicted to opioids. baltimore city health department commissioner of health on the challenges large cities like baltimore face dealing with opioid abuse. and maryland opioid to operational command center on efforts the state is making to counter opioid abuse. maryland democratic congressman elijah cummings talks about his effort along with elizabeth warren to direct $100 billion