president middleton on the student protests that led to his predecessor's resignation. sat a hearing on the religious and political ideology of isis, refugees from isis held territory discusses how the group funds itself. witnesses talk about how ideology motivated lone wolf attacks like the orlando shooter. this hearing of the homeland security is two hours.

good morning, this hearing will come to order. we have one witness who parked over at union station and making his way over here. he can join us when he gets here. i want to thank the witnesses for appearing for your time, your testimony. the mission statement of this committee, you have heard it repeatedly, but i'll repeat it again. to enhance the economic and national security of america. on the homeland security side, one of our top four priorities is doing whatever we can to keep our homeland safe to counter islamic terror. the goal of every hearing, from my standpoint coming from a manufacturing background, i solved a lot of problems. the first step in solving a problem is admitting you have one. but really facing reality. so the goal of every hearing is to lay out a reality. so that certainly the members of the committee, the people in the

audience understand what we're dealing with with a particular problem. today's hearing is our eighth hearing dealing with some form of component of the threat we face from islamic terror. it's a harsh reality. it's one i wish was not true. it was one i wish we didn't have to face. but we have to. we're going to be hearing testimony today that will be hard to hear. it will be hard to hear. but it's testimony that i think is incredibly important for us to hear. so i thank the witnesses for appearing. i would ask that my written statement be entered into the record, without objection. it's important for us to understand that islamic terrorists declared war on the united states. quite honestly, they declared on -- war on the civilized world. we didn't declare war on them. they declared war on us. i can't exactly point to the

date, but certainly one that's pretty visible was the first attempt to bring down the twin trade towers. that was on february 26th, 1993. and the fact that we didn't face the full reality right there and then i think eventually led to the fact that we then faced the tragedy of 9/11. we're almost 3,000 americans were slaughtered in that terrorist attack. now there are two ways to end a war. only two ways. either one side defeats the other or both sides decide to lay down their arms. the tragic events of yet another isis-inspired terror attack on this country in orlando has proven islamic terrorists are not laying down their arms. so the only way we're going to end this war, the only way we're going to keep our homeland safe, return peace to the civilized

world is if we defeat islamic terrorists, if we defeat isis. on september 10th, 2014 president obama laid out america's goal as it relates to isis. it was pretty simply stated. to degrade and ultimately defeat them. that was 22 months ago. 22 months ago. in testimony last week before the senate foreign relations committee, the cia director john brennan laid out reality as it relates to our success or lack thereof in our war on isis. and he testified that u.s. -- this is a quote, that isis remains a formidable, resilient and largely cohesive enemy. and that our efforts of not reduced their terrorism capability and their global reach.

now that is a depressing reality after 22 months. but it's a reality we have to face. so again, i just want to thank the witnesses. don't hold back. lay out the reality. the senators on this dais, that the american people understand the threat, the enemy we face and why it's crucial that we defeat them. i wish they would lay down their arms, and i wish they would declare peace, but it doesn't seem like that's going to happen. with that i'll turn it over to my ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first of all, thank you for delaying this hearing for a week so that our witnesses could be assembled. we have more time to prepare for this hearing. we welcome each of you. thank you for coming and sharing with us your stories and perspectives. they are valued and we're delighted you could come. i want to just follow up briefly on how the fight against isis is going. i went over a map today of that

part of the world. the u.s. and coalition forces which now number 60 nations, have recaptured almost 50% of the land that isis held once in iraq and syria. almost 50%. we're up to 47%. isis has also lost 20% of the land it once held in syria. ramadi was a key victory. last friday iraqi forces, ground forces captured a city in the center of fallujah and working to clear out the last few pockets of resistance in that city. so there's only 25 miles west of baghdad. as we speak, kurdish, iraqi and syrian democratic forces backed by the u.s. special forces are making preparations to retake isis key strongholds in mosul and raqqah. we have killed some 25,000 isis fighters and more than 120,000 key isis leaders.

we have cut isis funds by a third or more. we literally destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars in cash that they were hoarding and reduced by a dramatic amount their ability to realize profits from oil reserves and resources in that part of the world. we have drastically slowed the flow of foreign recruits from a high of about 2,000 a month in 2014 to 200 a month today. and there also goes for young americans who have sought to travel or join isis. one year ago about every month about ten americans were leaving this country to join isis. today that number is one per month. and at home the fbi is cracking down on recruits as well. over the past two years, the fbi has arrested 88 individuals on isis-related charges. i was a naval flight officer for 23 years. combined active and reserve,

i served five years in a hot war in southeast asia. i know a little bit about fighting wars. another 18 years up to the end of the cold war as a mission commander. one of the ways we're going to win this fight is not by ourselves. there's not an appetite in this country for putting boots on the ground but there is an appetite for working with a coalition of countries throughout the region and the world and that's what we're doing. i believe we're making progress. is it perfect? is that where we want to be, is this where we want to go? no, it is not. but i think we're making progress. the other thing i want to say is last saturday, nine days ago, my wife and i went up to new york. we have a son who lives in that area of the city. he took us for father's day and his mom's birthday to the 9/11 museum which is built right on the location of where the twin towers once stood. i was reminded there as we saw the faces and names and heard the voices of family members of some 3,000 people who died that day. i was reminded of the way we responded to that tragedy.

in this room, in this room we helped to key -- create the 9/11 commission. in this room e we received some 40 recommendations of bipartisan group presented to us by tom cane, presented by lee hamilton, former house chairman, co-chairs of the 9/11 commission. they presented to us after months and months of work some 40 recommendations that they came to unanimously on what we could do to reduce the likelihood these attacks would happen again. we adopted maybe 80% of them. almost unanimously. then set about implementing them. the response to that tragedy was bipartisan, it was a unified approach and ultimately it's been successful. ultimately it's been successful. and when you compare that response to the response of the tragedy in orlando, it could be could not be more different. my hope today is we're going to

have the kind of conversation with all of you to enable us to better improve this fight. and this is a fight we're going to win. a fight against isis. and we have a lot of allies that happen to be not just folks in this country, not just people who might be catholic or proddest an -- protestant, but together we're going to prevail. i ask unanimous consent that the rest of my statement be entered into the record. >> without objection. it is the tradition to swear in witnesses. if you will all rise and raise your right hand. >> do you swear the testimony before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> please be seated. our first witness is mr. hassan hassan. mr. hassan is an association fellow at the institute for middle east policy.

mr. hassan co-authored isis, inside the army of terror. in 2008, he started working in abu dhabi in journalism research focusing on syria and jihadist movements in the wider region. mr. hassan. >> thank you, chairman. ranking member carper, and members of the committee. in my introduction, i want to add i come from an isis-controlled area, controlled today. also, i have also interviewed dozens of isis members for my book, and other research. and i want to say this. this is not a sectarian war. the very people that isis claims to represent are victims of its brutality just as much as everyone else. there is -- this is reality felt on a daily basis. when a family and friends go to the market and see severed heads

on pipes or when isis condemns its sunni opponents, people that they claim to represent as upper states, they burn them alive, stab their hearts before they shoot them, they display their dead bodies for days in central squares. what it says to fellows, it doesn't matter if you pray, if you fast or ramadan, if you turn your faith towards mecca and pray. we will still kill you as long as you don't pledge allegiance to us. not far from where i come from in my area, isis killed 700 sunni villagers in a matter of days because they dared to stand up against the group. and i want to move on to say that as a belief system, those who believe in the islamic state ideology are minority, not only in the muslim world, but also

within the group. during my research, i found that members come in six categories. one, long-standing religious radicals. who deviate even from al qaeda. for example, they believe there's no sanctity of life. unlike al qaeda, which, for example, justifies killing civilians but only as collateral damage. isis considers killing civilians itself the preferred outcome. in fact, a month ago, exactly a month ago, the spokesperson for isis said when he called for sympathizers in the west and europe and the united states to launch attacks, he said i receive complaints from people, sympathizers saying we couldn't find military targets, and we are afraid to kill civilians. he said there's no such thing as innocent civilians in the west. in fact, he moved on to say we prefer that you kill civilians.

and he said i don't have time to justify that. basically, didn't even have the justification during the statement. and the second category of people who join isis are young zealots who are victims of the first category. people who are between 12 to 17. people who are drawn to this ideal of a caliphate and so on and so forth. they're brain washed. they are told that islam in a way that isis understands, that distorts a lot of things. because people don't have religious knowledge, they hear a lot of events and the traditions that isis relates for the first time. and there's a third category which is very important. people who are drawn to isis, political ideology, not religious one. this is a major problem, not only within isis, but i think in the region. people who are drawn to this

political ideology, not only for isis, but al qaeda and other islamic groups because they think there's political stagnation in the region and only these groups can actually shake up the political order in the region. and i think omar mateen belongs to a category of people who are only superficially influenced by this organization. he obviously didn't follow their way of life, but he still was an animated by this idea of the islamic state. the other categories drawn to the group because of its military success, attraction to brutality, or simply their profiteers, but the group swims in a sea of political failures in the region. that's where we should focus. it's not a surprise, for example, that isis emerged in iraq and in syria. countries that suffered

unimaginable brutality, violence over the past decade in the case of iraq, and half a decade in it case of syria. the group has built its narrative around the idea of sunni victimization. it benefits from the brutal reality in iraq and syria to say that sunnis are systematically under attack by iranian backed militias or governments in those two countries and that the two greatest superpowers in the world are helping both of them. and that there are traitors in our midst who help them. it's important without downplaying the genocidal acts of isis to highlight that the reg he'll of bashar al assad have carried out in damascus has carried out out almost all of its atrocities that isis has committed even before isis arrived in syria. in 2012, for example, pro-government militias in syria stormed villages, slaughtered children and women, and smashed

using rocks, heads of condemned people. and i just want to conclude by saying and emphasizing that isis thrived in this context and should be defeated in this context to stem its international appeal. this can only happen at the hands of the very people isis claims to represent. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. hassan. our next witness is dr. tarek elgawhay. he is the director of religious studies for the world organization for resource development and education. he also serves as the ceo of the co exist corporation and a trustee of the coexist foundation. he has a ph.d. from princeton. and he studied islamic science at seminary in cairo, egypt. >> senators johnson and carper, thank you for the opportunity and the other members of the committee. i would like to make brief introductory remarks and try to save the other maybe discussion

points for questions and answers. i would like to add to what senator johnson said in the beginning, that before isis or isil and other related groups declared war on our homeland, they declared war on islam. and this is not only a threat to our homeland, not only a threat to our national security, but an existential threat to our religion. islam in sunni and shia expressions is defined by a very robust, interpretive methodology. that's what you go to seminary to be trained in. very briefly, this methodology requires one to understand the divine text, to understand the text of the koran, the understand the various statements of the prophet. there are 6,233 verses in the koran, there are 60,000 to 70,000 and there are over 100,000 narrations of this prophetic texes. understanding the texts means understanding about a dozen

different sciences beginning with arabic grammar, syntax, morphology, logic, all of these different interpretive tools we use to understand what does the text actually mean in the context in which it was revealed. the second thing is to understand the context that we live in now. the current moment. understanding full well that people change, times change, circumstance change. and location and place change. how does one fast the month of ramadan in the northern latitudes in which the early muslim generations never experienced. how do we deal with usury, with the light of currency, not backed by gold or silver bouillon, so on and so forth. so that further adds that one needs to understand the current moment we live in and its complexity and its changing. and then the third aspect of this interpretive paradigm is how do we link the divine text into the current moment in which we live? and that, as we were taught, is a talent. not everyone is endowed with

that type of talent. viral and extremist groups like isil have no interpretation whatsoever, nor do they have a fundamental understanding of islam. they're unlettered warmongers who have in essence created a parallel religion. yet the parallel religion they call to is no more islamic than a pool with one lemon squeezed in it is lemonade. because of their gross misunderstanding of the primary text and because of their lack of a robust interpretive methodology, the good news is we're able to identify what is so wrong with their thinking. in my work and in my analysis, i have been able to dedeuce about a half a dozen or so main concepts that they have, and have been able to trace them back to a certain cluster of sources that are used by every single islamist extremist group from the middle of the 20th century until our time today. and in that, i am able to

isolate those concepts, we're able to provide a counter-narrative and deal with it. i don't have an army at my disposal. i don't own weapons whatsoever. i leave that to law enforcement. what i have is my intellect, my scholarly training, and i can employ that to provide a robust counter-narrative to inoculate our youth, to protect the next generation, and make it absolutely unequivocally clear that what isil represents, what they stand for, has nothing to do with the religion whatsoever. thank you. >> thank you, dr. elgawhay. our next witness is mr. subhi nahas. he is an activist for transgender rights who fled syria in 2012 after receiving threats from soldiers and jihadists because of his sexual preference. he fled first to lebanon and then turkey. he applied with the united nations for refugee status. he was granted refugee status after a year and moved to the

united states. in august 2015, he testified before the united nations council summit on lgbt rights in syria. mr. nahas. >> chairman johnson, ranking member carper, members of the committee, thank you for offering me the honor and the opportunity to be here today to share my story in the context of the larger events happening here in the world and here in the united states. my personal story mirrors the stories of many other lgbt individuals. one day i was heading to university. an organized group of militants accosted solely because they perceived me as gay. in a local mosque, they said they would clear the city of all sodomites. isis had not yet been formed. but the regime, they targeted all gay men in the country. i fled from my home country of syria in 2012.

after living in a country of lebanon for six months, i moved to turkey. my history of activism for lgbt right meant that even in turkey, i once again find myself in danger. extremist groups like al qaeda and isis were gaining strength and access there. although i was employed for two years in a senior position with save the children international, i was still not safe because of my sexual identity. a syrian friend informed me i had been targeted for death. the director of save the children helped me with a u.n. refugee agency. to be assembled to a safer country. prior to my resettlement, i completed an extremely thorough screening process which included testifying under oath in front of an officer from the dhs, security checks, medical tests, and cultural orientation. after this ten-month process, i

was relocated to san francisco. in august, 2015, a few months after resettlement, i spoke with members of the un security counsel about the threats in the middle east during a historic events organized by the united states and chile. as i stated during the meeting, and to the press along with ambassador samantha power, isis was simply one of many threats to the lgbt community in the middle east. reports from recent refugees of syria say that isis and other groups actively target gay people. it is enough just to be perceived as gay by them to be arrested, tortured, or raped. then this perceived gay person can be thrown off of a building to a full crowd that will stone them to death if they're not death. while isis is viewed by the public as the most notorious group in syria and iraq, it may come as a surprise that their

methodology, when it comes to the treatment of lgbt people, is very similar to many other groups, including governments themselves. we know that many groups, including isis, target and kill gay people in syria. they just use different methods to kill. while good fortune has allowed me to begin a new, much safer life as a refugee in the united states, recent events in orlando show that lgbt people still face huge challenges here. a "new york times" reported on june 16th, even before the shooting rampage of the gay nightclub in orlando, florida, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people were already the most likely targets of hate crimes in america. according to analysis of data collected by the fbi. put simply, efforts to discredit the poisonous ideology of isis and other extremist groups while extremely important are

insufficient to completely erase the threats of lgbt violence either here in this country or abroad. rather we must -- we must also commit to combatting homophobia, xenophobia, and bigotry in all of its various forms, regardless of the source. in order to deal with these issues, i recommend two things. one, through the bridges and power unique to the united nations, support actions that promote not only human rights for lgbt persons but also love, inclusion, tolerance, and equality among religious communities. this requires continued u.s. leadership at forums like the u.n. human rights council and supporting funding for the u.n. institutions like the u.n. refugee agency. statements such as the one issued by the security council on monday condemning the orlando attack are critical.

the statement specifically denounced for the first time violence targeting people as a result of their sexual orientation, and it received support from russia and egypt. this will make it more difficult for those countries and others to argue that sexual orientation is not recognized -- is not a recognized international human right. two, we need partnerships across communities that can address the serious negative consequences of isis ideology, including assisting the communities affected by it. for example, i have launched a special project which assists lgbt refugees in the middle east and north africa region by providing shelter and education while also promoting in the u.s. and abroad a more positive image of the lgbt people. so thank you again for this opportunity. >> thank you, mr. nahas. our final witness is ms. nadia

murad, a yazidi rights activist. one of the thousands of women abducted and enslaved by isis. since her escape, nadia has been outspoken about her experiences. earlier this year, the iraqi government nominated her for the 2016 nobel peace prize. ms. murad. i will mention murad coincidentally is her interpreter. thank you. >> translator: mr. chairman, senators, i'm very grateful and very happy to be testifying among you and thank you for the opportunity. the first thing i would like to

tell you is that i was heartbroken when i witnessed the crimes in orlando because for the same reason, for no reason, they were killed, and they were abused just the way i was. but i wasn't surprised by this because i knew if isis was not stopped, they will deliver their crimes everywhere. when i was captured, i was 19 years old. i was one of the 6,000 yazidi women and children taken into captivity.

this happened on august 2014, more than a year and a half now, and isis attacked the yazidis for one reason, because they are considered infidels, not people of the book and their interpretation is that the men must be killed and the women and children must be enslaved. and this is what they apply to us, thousands of men, women, and children, were killed in the first day of the attack in sinjar. in the hottest days of the summer, more than 1,000 yazidis were stranded on the mountain.

it's true that crimes were committed in iraq and syria, but what happened to the yazidis was different. i was one of the girls who were enslaved in mosul. i was among one of the thousands of women taken to mosul. the first thing they did in mosul was to, after distributing us to the fighters, was to take us to the court and have us convert by putting our hand on the koran. [ speaking in a foreign language ]

>> translator: it is true that i was raped and soiled and abused, but i was lucky. i wish that everyone from the 6,000 women and children was like me because girls at age of 9 were raped as well. only in two hours in my village, more than 700 men were killed, among them were six of my brothers and the same day my mother was killed, too, for no reason, but for having a different religion. i am not saying that isis represents the islam, but isis is using the islam to commit its crimes.

we need to stop the ideology first. many people in the area had a choice to leave when isis came, but they were happy to join the islamic state when they came. there are many things for me to testify about and tell you today, just the time is limited and i don't speak english. i wish i could tell you more. i would like you to give me more one minute if possible. >> take your time. we want to hear the story. please. take whatever time it takes. >> translator: this was

committed against the yazidis first, and it's still continuing until now. [ speaking in a foreign language ] >> translator: i deliver this message to egypt and to kuwait because what is happening has been happening under the name of islam. people there, they had the sympathy and they said this does not represent us. but we have not seen that daesh have been labeled as infidel group within islam from any muslim country. and i ask the leader in cairo is to say that isis is an infidel group within islam and he has not committed to it yet.

many families in iraq and syria when the yazidi women and girls were escaping to the houses, but no they could have helped them, but no, they seize them and give them back to the militants. daesh will not give up on their weapons unless we force them to give away their weapons. before all the arab countries must stop the flow of the citizens into daesh and prevent them from joining daesh. and we have to prevent the supplies of weapon and money to them. and we prevent their oil will not be sold.

and then we have to fight them militarily after that. the yazidis, all of the religious minorities in iraq, are unable to protect themselves in iraq and syria. a country as strong as your country cannot protect citizens in orlando or belgium and france, how can a minority like us protect ourselves when we're in the heart of the land where the radicals are. there are many things for me to ask you, because for three years we have been waiting. but the list is just too long

for me to ask you. i know what is going on now with modern yazidi girls and women who are still in captivity. when i was held for every hour, i was very happy and grateful that i was not sold, i was not raped. one hour was counted for me, and every hour was counting for me. i was freed, but i do not enjoy the feeling of the freedom because those who committed this crime have not been held accountable. what happened to the yazidi

people was a genocide. just the first day, thousands were killed. the first displacement of 80 persons of the yazidi people who do not have the joy of a tent to live in. and for holding more than 1,000 yazidi children in syria to be trained to have the exact same ideology that the crimes were committed under. because of the children who are at age of 9 who didn't enjoy the childhood and became slaves.

and for the people who drown in the aegean sea and that's also a crime of isis because the people escaped because of isis. because thousands of our children also have been prevented from going to school, and this is all because of them. today, i'm saying that small religious minorities such as the yazidis, christians, and other minorities, if they are not protected, they will be wiped out. we only are seeking peace. we want to live with dignity wherever we are. [ speaking in a foreign language ]

>> translator: as a little girl, i had a dream. that dream was to open a beauty salon, and i was prevented from accomplishing that dream, and that's the exact same story with thousands of children and people like me who were preventing to continue pursuing their dreams. this should not be practiced against islam, but the crimes have been committed in the name of islam, and the muslims must be the first one to resist this.

i don't like anyone to be attacking an entire religion, for example, the family that liberated me in muslim. but at the same time, this has been committed under the name of islam. there is so much time that is needed for me to tell my entire story. but now i will stop and i will give you the opportunity to ask any questions. >> thank you, ms. murad. thanks for your courage in coming forward and testifying. let me just ask. did any of your family survive? >> translator: yes. two of my sisters, three of my brothers, and some of my nephews and nieces.

18 people from my family and extended families are killed or missing. >> can you tell us how you escaped? >> translator: i never believed i would be able to escape because not me or other girls because we were held in areas it was vastly occupied by isis. the first couple days, i tried to escape because i could not hold on more on the rape that was committed against me and the insults that were committed against me, i could not take it more. i decided to escape.

i attempted to escape, but i was not successful. i was taken back, and i became a subject of rape by multiple people. collective rape. the second time i attempted to escape, i was successful, and a family in mosul helped me and they made for me an islamic i.d. with that i.d., i was able to escape from mosul. >> you mentioned 3200 additional yazidi girls and women being held captive. are they dispersed throughout syria and iraq at this time?

>> translator: yes, they are everywhere because they are not held in a specific place. what is happening is that they are being sold, and their places will be changed from a place to another. >> by the way, we are holding questioning in five minutes because we have so many members attending this. thank you. i want to go to dr. elgawhay. a real scholar in islam. can you just explain, is there any way for you to -- for us to understand how did -- how did adherence of this barbarity of this violence, how did it get to that point? what happened? >> so, thank you, nadia, and nadia mentioned -- so nadia was saying that daesh, they don't represent islam, but they use islam. she gave some examples, but

they're using islam wrong. for example, they told her she has to go to court and swear on the koran to become a muslim, but that's not how you become a muslim. you become a muslim by testifying. so even small mundane things, they don't even understand. and i just was so moved by what she said, and it reminded me that the prophetic text, peace be upon them. he said fear the supplication of the oppressed because there's no veil between that supplication and the lord. and he never mentioned it's muslim or not a muslim, and he said i am the protector of the religious, the defender of the religious minority on the day of judgment of the muslim that aggresses against the religious minority. it's a big question you asked, senator johnson, but basically the way i see is they're taking certain concepts or certain phrases and adding to it and appropriating to it new meaning

that doesn't exist. for example, nadia mentioned one of the things they told her is that yazidis don't count as the people of the book. they're apostates, but the people concept is not conscriptive, it's descriptive. it describes an organized religion that has a legal code, a book meaning, a sacred text, so on and so forth. as muslims expanded eastward, out of air abia, they encountered yazidis. these are communities that have co-existed with muslims from the first generation of islam up until now. all the other hinduism, taoism, all of these religions, muslim scholars understood these as people of the book because it's a description, not proscriptive. this is how they misunderstand things. their basic access around which this thinking exists is declaring people to be apostates.

i'm an apostate according to him, therefore they can aggress against me. why am i an apostate? i don't agree with what they agree. i don't pledge allegiance to them. so on and so forth. with this tactic, they go on and on and on. one last thing nadia mentioned, in cairo, why doesn't the senior leadership of sunni islam declare isis as nonislamic, because i know that's a common question i get. our understanding of organizations like isis is even worse than apostasy because there's no punishment for it. the prophet said thee people are outliers. and in all of his mercy and all of his love and all of his beautiful teachings, he said [ speaking in a foreign language ] . he said that they are the dogs of hell fire, and he said glad tithings to those who fight them and kill to those that fight them and

kill them and are killed in the process of killing them about the outliers. it's even worse. it's even more of a derogatory statement, derogatory label, than being an apostate. it's an obligation on all of us in the family of islam to do what we can to combat it with whatever tools we have at our disposal. >> one very quick question for you, mr. hassan. a population, 1.4 billion, 1.6 billion. what percent of this population adhered to this barbaric ideology? do you have any sense of that whatsoever? >> for me? >> whoever has an estimate. >> isis doesn't need a lot of numbers. we have seen this recently when they start being put -- when there is a force that pushes them in a certain area. they can hold territory with

like 200 people. i think they are a very small minority, even within the syrian rebel groups. they are still a smaller group than others, but i think because of the sheer violence and brutality they deter people. they use a word in their literature which means deterrence with extreme violence, brutality. so when they kill one person, they make sure that 100 or 1,000 people see that person being killed. >> senator carper. >> thank you. did you say we have five minutes? >> yeah. there's so many people here, so -- >> okay. again, our thanks to each one of you for joining us today. and for sharing with us some parts of your lives that are not easily shared. we're deeply grateful to each of you, but especially to you, nadia. thank you. here in the united states we

are, as you probably know, are people of many different religions. we're protestant, catholic, we're jew, we're muslim, hindu, buddhist. we're other religions as well. and one of the reasons why our country was established was because of the concept, the nature, of freedom of religion. people yearning to not just to be free, but to be free to worship god as they saw fit. there are some people who take the bible, most people in america probably protestant and catholic, most, but certainly not all, but some people who take verses of scripture out of the bible and they twist it in ways they're not meant to be done. and there are people of our own faith who bastardize our faith, cherry pick our faith. a great example is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. that same verse of scripture goes on to say revenge is mine, said the lord.

there's another verse in scripture that says when i was in stranger in your land, did you take me in. and we have some people in this country, some political leaders, i don't know that they've read matthew 25, but there are some people in this country who have argued that the united states needs to stop accepting not just syrian refugees, but in some cases all muslim refugees. and in the case of the syrian refugees, they would not allow us to accept, they could not be muslim, they could be christian, they could be a jew. a variety of religions. and i would just ask maybe starting with you, mr. elgawhay, with you, and just ask, what are your opinions about a ban on all syrian refugees? and or even all muslim refugees and how much -- how such a ban would affect the ability in this country to counter isis propaganda and ideology? would you go first?

>> i'm not really trained as a politician, so -- >> neither are we. we're untrained. >> at the risk of making or saying a political statement, i mean, i think as an american, i understand -- >> my question is what are your thoughts about how a ban on all syrian refugees or really all muslim refugees, how does that effect our country's ability to counter isis propaganda? >> as i understand our nation, it's un-american not to accept refugees. and we have, i think, a legal, political, and more importantly, moral authority to take people in that we can. and this is what, you know, e

pluribus unum, this is what makes our nation great. from a social cohesion standpoint, societies that are more plural are stronger. i think that by bringing in refugees, we will be able to understand the problem more and see how we can help them more, but i think some sort of form of isolationism or some sort of rejection will only increase the problem and make it fester more. >> good, thanks. other witnesses, please. same question. >> sure. i can say two things. the first one is that i try to keep in touch with people who left syria and they now live in germany and other countries, and i have seen how positive the message that european countries in the case only recently here that they accepted them. and that was a positive sense, only hearing good things from refugees. they praise the germans and how hospitable they are and so on and so forth. the other thing we have to recognize, i think, especially

for the united states, that thousands of syrian refugees who left syria and turkey and europe for the united states have been instrumental in the fight against isis. they provide intelligence information, guidance, and you know, isis operates in these areas that, you know, in eastern syria and northeastern syrian and northwestern iraq. and these people have been affected most by violence, driven out. i mean, they're the reason why they're helpful in the fight against isis. >> all right, thank you. anyone else? very briefly. >> okay. from my experience as a refugee myself, i went through the process. i could say it is very highly unlikely for the process to let any terrorists that comes -- it's a highly intense process which takes security checks, background checks, waiting

period for over like a year, at least a year and eyewitnesses. they ask you a lot of personal questions. and for the slightest chance to let a terrorist or a guy or girl that believes in these ideologies to pass through is highly unlikely. >> all right. thank you. nadia, could you briefly respond to my question, please? very briefly. >> translator: i would like to say that every country has a right to protect itself and to protect its borders and its laws. but the people who are escaping from the religious discrimination and genocide, they should not face closed doors before them.

i would like just to say that if the terrorists want to go someplace, they can go regardless of the process. and some of them have already emigrated. >> i think we have a moral imperative. we face in this country a moral imperative to be true to those words written at the statue of liberty. we have a moral imperative to matthew 25. when you're a stranger in our land, we take you in. but we also have a moral imperative to the people who live here and want to live in safety, live to be old and to have kids and grandchildren.

our challenge here is to make sure that while we need to be true to our faith in allowing people who are in distress and on the run and haunted by their memories, we need to be welcoming to them. we also at the same time have to be mindful of the need to protect our safety. sometimes, they're in conflict with one another. last thing i want to say, doctor, you can comment on this later. my understanding is every religion, just about every religion, including islam, has a golden rule. treat other people the way we want to be treated. is that true? is that not true of islam? >> yes, it is. >> my view is if all of us would abide by that, because that's part of the fabric of all of our religions, we would be a lot better off on this planet. thank you. >> senator carper, we equally went over. we need to keep five minutes to be respectful to all the people here. senator ayotte? >> i want to thank the chairman. i want to thank all of you for being here. in particular, mr. nahas and ms. murad, we're so sorry for what you have gone through and your

courage in coming forward today is very important for us to hear what you have endured and it is horrific. but i wanted to follow up, ms. murad, on the issue that actually you raised and i would like to have dr. elgawhay comment on it. that is, doctor, you said that what daesh is doing is beyond apostate. you have described it as the dogs of hellfire. and i would agree with that description. but what i want to understand is to what ms. murad asked, as we look at how the reaction should be from, for example, i think she may have identified the seminary in cairo, which i believe you studied at, which is a very, very important seminary in islam. do you believe that leaders in this seminary and other leaders in the muslim world have

described and have called out daesh in the way that you have described it today as forcefully as they should? >> thank you, senator. so just a correction. those weren't my words. i was quoting prophet muhammad. prophet mohammad said the outliers are the dogs of hellfire. >> what i want to understand is to really answer her question, do you think that leaders in a position to influence -- influence what islam truly stands for, do you think they have been forceful enough in calling out whether you call them dogs of hellfire, apostate, however, how daesh is warping, as you have testified today, your religion? >> so i think yes and no. i think there are definitely those who are very outspoken. one scholar that comes to mind

that we have worked with is a syrian refugee for all intents and purposes who is now living in morocco. he's written a non-binding religious opinion in english against isis. and he makes the argument, which is a valid argument, that daesh or isis are in fact outside of the folds of islam. but if you have worked with scholars and academics, they are slow on the uptake and not good in front of the camera. >> we need leaders. >> that's one of the problems, i think, one of the deficiencies, the weak points, is that its communications capacity. in a former life, i actually helped establish the office of communications for egypt between 2003/2000 -- 2003-2007 before i went to

princeton. that was, wow, a coup. when i asked them how do you deal with journalists, they said we call the police and arrest them. you have to work with the media because if you don't, what you're trying to say is not going to get out there. i think there's a lot of training that can happen to help that. i agree with you, more needs to be done. more voices need to be heard. >> thank you. ms. murad, i wanted to -- i wanted to say i believe that daesh has engaged in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. how important do you believe it is -- you have put in your written testimony today and you have also told us -- how important is it for the united states to formally recognize daesh's actions as genocide? and i mean with reference to the yazidis and what you have told us today about how they're treating the yazidis.

>> translator: it's very important for us that what's happening to us to be acknowledged as a genocide. just a few days ago, when the u.n. acknowledged the genocide for the yazidis who have been hopeless for the past two years, this was the first time they started having some hope. >> translator: i would like these crimes to be legally recognized by you and i would like to be acknowledged

and i would like you to look into the crimes, the things i have said today, and the things daesh has done. they have publicly said they will do it and they did it, and i would like you to look at these crimes and evidence. >> i want to thank all of you for being here. and i would just say, there is a senate resolution, a resolution 340, which would call this for what it is, a genocide. and i hope that we can come together and declare -- i would like to see the administration declare this a genocide. and also would like us as a congress to come together and declare this for what it is. thank you. >> senator tester. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all of you for your testimony. dr. elgawhay, i came in towards the last half of your comments. one of the things you said at the very end -- i just want you to confirm this. isil has nothing to do with religion. did i hear you right? >> isis has nothing to do with islam.

that's what i believe i said. >> okay. so tell me the difference real quick. >> i began by saying that normative islam in its sunni and shia expressions is defined by an interpretive methodology and walked through the high level of what that is. >> right. >> and the text that we have, what we believe to be divine text live in time, and there's a tradition in how we interpret these verses and these injunctions for the moment we live in. isis, they're unlettered. they're completely unlettered in the religion, in the fundamentals nor do they have an interpretive methodology. what they conclude is based on their own whims and desires what they're reading prima fascia.

>> got you. so i keep coming back to why these guys exist. there's absolutely a criminal element, because we saw that in paris, saw it in brussels. that people belong to isil. there's also doctors, engineers, well-educated folks that are part of it. that quite frankly shouldn't be a part of a twisted ideology as this. could you tell me what about their ideology appeals to that broad of a base of crooks and professionals and everything in between? >> so maybe hassan would know more because he's actually interviewed more of them. i think that the first thing i would point out is that i don't know if they necessarily believe in what isis is saying or they're coerced to believe in what isis is saying or what they're holding to be true. i also think -- >> coerced by force? >> coerced by them, by isil and what not. >> so you believe this or you're going to die? that kind of coercion? >> exactly. as we heard the example and

other stories that come out in isil-controlled areas. there's a spectrum of extremist fraught in islam. it can start as something sort of innocuous, but there's something wrong with that way of thinking and it can slide. i think when they find somebody that sort of looks like they're from central casting, they're able to pull them to that side. >> there's a lot of folks in that group. it appears to me anyway. would you want to comment very briefly on that or just agree with the doctor, if he's correct? >> i mentioned in the testimony before that the people who believe in the sort ideology isil believes in, really believe in it, are only two categories. people who are young zealots who are indoctrinated by another category which is of long-standing radicals who believe in declaring fellow muslims as infidels, apostates, based on specific criteria they

have. they rely on books like there are two books that come to mind. without getting into too much detail. there is a book, for example, that is 1,000 pages of a man who when he appears on tv and he explains his methodology of fatwa. he said fatwa should not be -- should not be done in the same way that muslim clerics have done it over the centuries. >> all right. >> that i, as a person, i can declare you as a fellow muslim as an apostate based on my impression of you, if you work with the west against muslims or if you're an agent to a certain government and so on and so forth. the criteria are very post-modern in a way. >> okay. back to you, doctor. so are there statements or actions the u.s. has taken that might encourage people to be a part of isil? >> for me? >> dr. tarek. >> to be honest, that's a tough question for me to answer.

i think that the rhetoric that comes out of isil sometimes makes us think that if it were not for the u.s. invasion in iraq, if it were not for the u.s. policy doing this or the u.s. policy doing that, but the fact of the matter is that one can make that argument for any other country. one could make that argument for any other regional player in that region. and you know, politics is all based on interest, geopolitical interest, and things like that. i don't think that's necessarily fair. i think because america is so dominant in the world and so out there it's just an easy target and it's an easy, oh, well, if america just stopped di eped do, we'll stop doing that. that's not going to happen. if we stop doing whatever they say, they're not going to change. >> my time is up. i want to thank you all for your testimony. i'll submit -- i'll submit questions to record if appropriate. thank you. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman, and thank you all for such thoughtful comments and for such thoughtful words and such courage and bravery, especially our last two witnesses.

i think everyone here who frequently spends a lot of time on their smartphones during testimony sat in and really listened and really you moved us all. thank you so much for your courage. and for the fact that you're survivors, and as survivors, you're willing to provide testimony as to the horror and as to the imperative that we all as good people need to engage. but i want to, for a minute, turn to our first two witnesses and just kind of engage in a discussion about message and messengers. doctor, i was fascinated by the work that you have done basically parsing kind of the perversion and responding to the conversion of -- or the perversion of islam that is being done by these radical groups. and obviously, having met with people who have been radicalized, have a pretty good sense of what messages could we

deliver that would actually make a difference, especially in this country, when now i think our greatest threat is radicalization of young men and women or american citizens. we have seen that now twice. so there's two parts of a message. it's the right message and then the messenger. i'm just going to make a couple points. i want both of you to respond to what you think the right message is and the right messenger, and i want to know if you're familiar with what the department of homeland security is doing today to try and provide a counter message and offer any advice to us as we review that in our role of oversight. and that will be the last question i ask. and i would like that you both split up your time. >> thank you. in terms of messaging, i think it's different because it's complicated because isis should be treated as two organizations in one. there's the local one that operates and has -- operates on the ground in syria and iraq and

elsewhere like libya and elsewhere. they have their own messaging. usually based on sectarianism. and there is international, which is a very close to al qaeda. they, in fact, are trying to re-collect and regather the dispersed networks of al qaeda that were basically dispersed after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the campaign against it. so they're trying very hard to do that in europe, in the united states, and elsewhere, but also in north africa. so the messages should be different because they're different organizations. on the ground, internationally, there is this danger that what happens like it's appeal on the ground has become an international appeal. why? because it presented itself as some sort of an idea that everyone is fighting and the enemies of this organization are the west or iran or something else. this organization stands for

something. the most effective messaging against this is not talk too much about only the victims of isis outside the group that it claims to represent, but rather what's really happened on the ground, which is on a daily basis the group kills fellow sunnis, people it claims to represent, and we don't see that in media. for example, next to my village, i mentioned they killed 700 people and only "the washington post" did the story about that. at the time it killed 700 people. it's not the sectarian organizers or the sect or islam versus the west.

it is a crazy organization that recasts itself in religious terms that people of that faith rejected and that needs to be hammered again and again. >> as far as messaging, i think there needs to be an unequivocal counter narrative from muslim leaders. no wishy washy stuff. there is yes, no, black, white, period. what i have been trying to do is conduct a traditional class and try to deconstruct it in a detailed way. my goal is for young muslim people to understand why it's

wrong. that kind of effort is what we need more of. i think the english language is very important because a lot of the media is in english in an appeal. as far as recommendations, somethisome of the things that come to mind in montgomery county, we noticed a drastic increase in bullying. i think anti-bullying work is very important so that children feel safe and they are not pushed to the sides and we work to help them get settled. they have something to plug into. those are the things. one last thing. i think media training for muslim leaders abroad is also

very important. and i think there's a lot of good people. there's a lot of -- i can't remember who we were talking about earlier. there's a lot of good leaders who are making the right argument, but they need to know how -- you can't write a 40-page legal opinion and expect that to be trending on twitter. it is just not going to happen. when i told my teachers that, they're like, what we're saying is the dumbed down version of what our teachers said. we have to stop the humility thing and we have to be start about how we inject this message into the media. the training is very, very important. the social media for leaders abroad. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and the republicans here today. thank you for your compelling

testimony. we have been playing persecution and terror. people see the human face of refugees in this country. your presence here today is important and hopefully many people today will see that and be as moved as i know everybody on this panel has been moved by your testimony. thank you for your courage to be here today. doctor, i would like you to respond to the debate back and forth in the political realm as to whether or not we should call isis radical islam. when you hear someone calling it radical islam, do you think that is accurate with isis? >> i seem to be intent on

getting all the difficult questions. there is no -- there is nothing wrong with labels because a lot of times we get stuck in labels. they are only what their definition is. if i use that term, a lot of people in my community get upset. people who look muslim and according to the koran, they are doing horrible things. they are terrorists for sure, but they are different than a neo-nazi group, for example. i don't have a problem with that. when people say that, congress or the white house or in the media, i understand what is meant. however, i fear that that can easily sligy lily slide into an

radical islam. that's where the fear is. we limit it to what it's supposed to define. >> that's a good question. when i was here, i was an advocate of these terms. i remember the late saudi king who died two years ago. he admonished for the first time and i said i feel you are lazy and not speaking up. but i think when i moved to the u.k. last year, i felt there was a question of messenger. and it's important to keep this in mind. this is the thing that isis did in the middle east. it wants to polarize its enemies and polarize the society under its control and they want to divide their enemies and they have succeeded in the middle east and they'll succeed here

getting people talking about whatn to call it and whatno not call it. this organization is declaring war on islam, and here it is help muslims fight the organization. >> i appreciate that. the issue we face here in the united states in dealing with this threat deals with lone wolves, folks who may be inspired by what they see and the ideology. is it safe to say the folks who may be inspired by this are folks who really have very little understanding of islam? is there a correlation there? and does that have something to do with this recent shooter who was claiming i believe allegiance to isis and at some point hezbollah and how that may be inconsistent? you can kind of address what may be going on in the minds of lone

wolves and what we should be considering when responding. >> they have little to no understanding of religion and that's the emergency. they have no training or a teacher and what i described earlier takes place. i think that's definitely a fear. people that are surfing online finding a lecture here, finding a statement there, and forming some kind of conclusion and acting on it, i definitely think it is a problem. i think more instruction, more religious literacy for muslims, will help in that regard. >> senator baldwin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i want to add my words of

appreciation and thanks to our panel. very, very powerful testimony. thank you for being here. wanted to start -- i know the hearing is about the ideology of isis, of daesh. and yet it was called in the wake of a horrible tragedy in orlando that was at once a terrorist-inspired attack and also a hate crime in this case against members of the lgbt community -- it was also latin night at the club, and it's unclear whether that was contributing to the targeting of the club on that particular night. mr. nahas, when you were

testifying, you shared with us that attacks against lgbt syrians preceded the formation of isil, that it was called for or tolerated or perpetrated by the regime as well as militants who opposed the regime in syria, that they, too, perpetrated violence against lgbt syrians. in the u.s. violence, bullying, intimidation, discrimination against members of the lgbt community has a long history also. and in the early days, you could certainly argue that it was sanctioned at one point in our nation's history by the

government also, but things have changed. and i want to just draw attention to something you highlighted in your testimony about the u.n. security council acting very recently to recognize that lgbt rights are human rights, a first in that international forum. you highlighted it as something that is very important in moving forward. i guess i want to ask in terms of your proposals, your recommendations, to this committee and to others how important it is for governments, for authorities, for regimes to say lgbt rights are human rights? and how dangerous is the absence of that, the silence to that?

>> thank you, senator, for this important question. from my own experience growing up as a gay man in syria, i know that -- i knew at an early age that the government has laws against us and we're not -- my existence was not legal, so i was not allowed to say it out loud. i was not allowed to be out in the open. it was punishable up to three years in prison. this is the least. it could be persecuted by your own community members, so it is very important for us to put the words out there to say to governments and hold them accountable to tell them that lgbt rights are human rights. that are not, from my understanding -- my community and traditions say lgbt rights are only sexual rights.

they don't relate at all to human rights. to make this message clear to governments and their communities, it is important to elevate the consequences that i witnessed in my country where we're being bullied all the time, persecuted, harassed in the streets, even verbally and physically abused. we could not go anywhere. we could not go to the bullies. we could not tell our families because if we do, they will persecute us more because they will always say you have to man up and defend yourself. this is an not an issue that you can talk about. but if these international platforms were used in a proper way to deliver the message, to tell the governments that these rights should be addressed probably, it delivers a very strong message. >> thank you.

i wanted to follow up -- >> can you do it for the record? >> a question for the record then. senator peters was asking questions about self-radicalization and lone wolves. and i think in the case of orlando it is not clear how deep of an understanding the perpetrator, the gunman, had with -- appeared to have relationships online with various terrorist organizations, but i guess i want to ask an even broader question about self-radicalization because we have seen in recent instances of mass gun violence in the u.s. people who are self-radicalized, but inspired by different types of hatred, hatred of a minority

religion as we saw in wisconsin, mr. chairman, when a gunman entered the sikh temple in oak creek, as we saw in charleston motivated by racial hatred. what can we learn about self-radicalization and in studying those who have been self-radicalized by isil when dealing with self-radicalization for people who hold different types of hatred? >> and the witnesses can answer that in written responses. senator langford? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for being here. i appreciate your bravery in coming forward and your courage to be able to speak out. these are important days and we need to be able to hear clear, articulate voices. i thank you for bringing that. what is the end goal for isis? what do they see on the horizon? they are fighting for what and

they will know they have achieved it when? >> well, they say they want a caliphate that dominates the world. this is their stated mission. i think their realistic objective is to control syria and iraq and expand in the region and become this leader of jihad and global jihad. that's why they have spent so much effort on targeting al qaeda. they're more critical of al qaeda than probably other ones because they see them as their competitors and their rivals. they're goal is regional dominance, but obviously they want to expand in the west and elsewhere. >> so you're talking about the regional dominance. yet they're trying to motivate people in western countries, whether it be europe, the united states, australia, to be able to fight and attack in those locations as well. so why try to motivate people in australia or in the united states or in europe to be able to fight for them if the goal is

the caliphate there? >> well, listen to them and how they talk, reading their books, the books they say they read. they talk about the war today. and this is important i think for the anti-isis campaign today because there is this tendency to think about tactical defeat as strategical defeat through isis. isis is a long-term project. they talk about a war of attrition. they want to exhaust the west, exhaust everyone else. to think ten years ago, the americans were in iraq. they had the appetite to fight us. ten careyears later, president a had little appetite or less appetite to fight us. in ten years, that will be even less. they have a core that is mostly

consisting of security officials. these are the most dangerous people. many of them were former members of saddam hussein's security parties. they shape the organization in terms of how it operates and how it works and how it ensures itself survival. so i think they have that goal. that core won't go away. you can defeat the organization, defeat the members that joined it two years ago and so on, but they think of their long-term strategy as a war of attrition. >> okay. if you go back 15 years ago or 10 years ago, the united states was talking and challenging and the west was challenging leadership in islam to call out -- now it is a challenge towards isis or nusra front. we see this springing up in multiple areas around the world.

you used the term radical islam is twisting off, but it is not just around isis. it is around mostly isis today, but it could be nusra front or al qaeda or others. it's a more broad system. is it a confront isis or is it a confront a larger set of teachings that is separate from traditional islam? >> that's the difference between defeating the organization tactically. you can launch military -- very effective military campaign against it and you can defeat it. expel it from mosul, raqqah, fa flfa -- fallujah, but the broader appeal of like minded groups like al qaeda that believe in violence as a strategic goal rather than violence just because they're pushed to violence --

>> does the worldwide movement of isis diminish if they do not have a functioning caliphate in syria and iraq? >> it will, but i fear we have reached the point today where what is happening on the ground in iraq and syria doesn't effect the international appeal of isis. i think this is directly because the campaign against isis hasn't been done properly. using the wrong forces to fight isis in towns where these forces are viewed suspiciously is a disastrous campaign. for example, allowing the ypg, which is an organization affiliated to the pkk in turkey, which is designated by the u.s. as a terrorist organization. using that organization to fight isis, another terrorist organization, in sunni arab

areas, that's just wrong. i think the campaign today is allowing isis to convert territorial losses into legitimacy in that region specifically. that's why i've been warning time and again that the campaign is not being done properly. it is only making isis stronger. >> thank you. >> senator booker? >> yeah, i think senator langford's line of questioning is right on. i would like to pick up right where he left off. you say in your testimony you can defeat the group in raqqah, mosul, fallujah, but these defeats will remain tactical. could you go deeper than that? what specifically are ewe ayou advising us today? we're giving them more strength in some ways in the way we're doing it. can you be more specific? >> isis was defeated in iraq in

2006 after the surge, but isis came back and took mosul. it was defeated from 2006 and 2010. it was a very marginal organization in iraq. sunni arabs in the areas that isis operated in defeated the organization, worked with the americans, and policed the areas. that worked, but then the policy that followed in 2010 when iraq -- when the united states pulled out of iraq before iraq was able to govern itself because there was support, perceived support, between -- cooperation between the u.s. and iran to work with a sectarian prime minister and work with him despite the fact he was weakened and there's another shiite rival that was more tolerant. so the mistakes that followed

that very success, that success that was between 2006 and 2010, led to circumstances that enabled isis in 2012 to tell all sunnis in these areas, look, the only way forward is for us to work together and reject this government from our area. and they were able to rally people, mobilize people against this government. that's why they were able to take mosul in 2014, in the summer of 2014. took mosul, forced the iraqi army to drop its arms and flee, and they took massive american weaponry. they marched back into syria and fortified iraq. they became a stronger organization because the political failures. and my fear is there is so much focus on the military component rather than on the political and social and religious dimensions to what's going on there.

>> so i see your point. i also appreciate in your testimony discussing how we in the west should be trying to discredit -- or having islamic voices discrediting daesh. and maybe that gets me to your testimony, which i thought was really wonderful discussing all the ways that they're perverting islam in the way that they're waging their war and taking advantage of our political failures in terms of how we're gaining territory. and so this is not a clash of civilizatio civilizations. this is people perverting islam and taking advantage of political realities. so i just want to get from you -- and you said this already, but i want to go one step deeper. for us who have focused so much on cv efforts here in the senate, what are the specific

tactics then to start to expose isil for the perversions that they're doing and discredit them? what are some of the best ways to go about that? >> thank you, senator. i think i really believe in the counter narrative. and that's very, very important because when i started to do this less than a year ago, i realized that there's no very articulate, very clear cut counter narrative. by counter narrative, i mean how does islam deal with issues of plurality, citizenship, nation states. all of these things have been argued in the last 200, 300 years, but unknown to the vast majority of muslims. the bones they're picking with modernity have been dealt with already. it's just the memo hasn't been passed around. the counter narrative is effective because it is steeped in authentic scholarship.

it is based on the primary sources, the koran, the suna. >> i'm going to interrupt you there. i hope you make yourself available for further questions. i want to say in my remaining ten seconds your testimony was so courageous and so moving. the outrageous attacks going on against lgbt people in the middle east and here in the united states, which as you point out in your testimony is the most common types of hate crimes we see, i'm grateful for your honesty and courage. ms. murad, i'm grateful that you would come here today and share your story, which is so important to be hear. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator booker. i want to pick up on both senator langford and senator booker's line of questioning just in terms of what's been the reality situation in terms of success or lack of success

against it. there's a state department report called the start report, study of terrorism response terrorism. when i looked at -- and i did a little calculation -- the number globally of people killed in terrorist attacks in 9/11, it is a little under 5,000. with updated numbers, that's grown five, six, seven times. this is a really growing threat. the isis news report showed that outside of syria isis-inspired attacks that have cost 9,991 lives. we've made some progress. we've taken back some territory, but they still control territory. the analysis i'm somewhat using is that of a beehive. you might have a beehive in your

backyard. is that what we're witnessing? what is the danger there? we do have to defeat isis. we have to deny them that territory. we have to deny them that caliphate, but then we have a lot of mopping up to do. these islamic terror groups, if anything, they're spreading. they're growing. they're evolving. they are metastizing. >> they're on their own trajectory of expanding for the next decade or two. i think it's important. at this moment isis is being rolled back. it is being defeated territorially in iraq and syria. 50% in iraq. they lost 50% of their territory. they lost 20% of their territory in syria. and libya, they're also on the

back foot. in libya they're struggling to even establish any presence there. al qaeda is doing very well in yemen. the same thing in afghanistan. they're not doing very well there. so their capacity currently is limited. however, i think the ability to inflict damage is strong. the benefit from the open space obviously on the internet, self-radicalization. you can become self-radicalized by watching the american citizen who was killed in a drone attack in 2011, i think. it's very easy to become one of them. the radicalization, the sorts of radicalization, that leads someone to isis is swift and animating. meaning they can push a person in a very short time to do some damage. it is very hard to predict it, but it's there. it's a danger that will remain for a while. >> the gains we're rolling up in

syria and iraq, does that give you much comfort? you're saying this is a long-term project. you're thinking they're growing in strength over the next decade or two. >> briefly, that's good. the problem is the other tracks, the political track, the social religious and the political process in iraq and syria, the conflict is lagging behind. if they are catching up to the military advances, then isis will go away for a while, but for now the focus is on military while neglecting the other things is a problem. >> doctor, i want to shift a little bit to the muslim brotherhood. it is oftentimes reported as a more moderate group. do you have any thoughts about the muslim brotherhood? >> i have a lot of thoughts about the muslim brotherhood and like groups. i think that goes back to what i was trying to say earlier, the concept of a spectrum. while some of the groups are on the very left of the spectrum or

open to violence, there are certain procedural changes that take place if certain boxes were ticked on the form. then violence would be authorized. i'm always shocked, utterly shocked, at how engaging our government is of organizations like the muslim brotherhood. when i was living in cairo and i said why do you engage with muslim leaders, they give me a list. i think there's a big mismatch. i think by engaging with them so openly and so freely we almost legitimize that approach. i think it's dangerous. i think it's definitely on the spectrum, but it does not necessarily -- it's not a necessity that it will go from one end of the spectrum to another, but it is on the spectrum i'm concerned about. >> thanks.

again, we thank each of you for being with us today and spending this time with us and sharing your thoughts with us and your advice as well. i want to start with a question. i think i'll start with you, but then invite other witnesses to respond to. i think in your testimony you wrote that the united states must highlight that the war with isis is not a sectarian conflict. that's pretty much what you said, i think. you point out there are muslims of shia and sunni joining christians and jews and joining people of all religions and backgrounds fighting isis. some people in the u.s. are trying to paint this battle with isis as a broad clash with the west and the islam.

this kind of rhetoric is dangerous and it plays directly into the hands of isis. i would just ask do you agree with this? >> i agree this is not a sectarian war. this is not a war -- it's not an islam versus west war. in fact, if anything, the war with isis is all about muslims versus muslims. this is what the ideology is built on. if you track -- talk about ideas and ideology, but practically speaking like the way ideology of isis has matured and become kind of framed was a reaction to the events that happened after the iraq war, not the iraq war itself. for example, how sunnis reacted to the presence of americans on the ground and start declaring these people as apostates.

they started to appropriate events in islamic history to the context of what's going on here, so it's not at all about what's going on in the west. it's about what's going on on the ground in the muslim world. >> do you agree sort of portraying this war as a war against isis and islam plays into the hands of isis or not? >> i agree with what hassan was saying. i think, if anything, the victim of isil is islam itself. they have definitely declared war on our scholars, our sunni and shia sects. that's the biggest tragedy. i don't think -- and i think that our best allies in this are normative muslims that are people like me. i mean, my life is in threat just by being here speaking out against this. i don't say that lightly.

i think i want to stop that, but more probably than you do. i really want this to end. i want to know what i can do to push that forward. in that desire is the greatest idea we can have to counter the rhetoric and the ideas coming out of isil. >> same question, please. >> i'm sorry. i don't have the capacity to anxio answer this question. >> nadia, do you want to respond to that question please? do you agree painting this war against isis as a war against islam plays directly into the hands of isis and inadvertently we're helping isis by portraying this as a war against islam?

>> translator: the first thing i did, i went to egypt to deliver that message because the things that happened to me i wanted to go to these countries and tell them what happened to me. >> [ speaking foreign language ]. >> translator: i want to prevent the youth from joining the islamic state. i went and i told them what crimes were committed, what actions, what ideology they had. i want to stop the flow of the youth to them. speaking against this is not help for daesh. you have to speak against it. also, minimizing the role of

daesh or the power is not right because only isis border is more than 3,000 miles and they protected all their tens of thousands are fighting for them. some of our villages are only 150 people are living small villages. we have not been able to recapture these villages for a year and a half. so how about the big cities? it's not a small power. speaking against isis does not mean speaking against islam and also does not mean speaking in

favor of sunnis or shias, one against another. when we all speak together against, this then we are united. then we can defeat it. >> my time has expired. mr. chairman, you and i are both supporting legislation that would strengthen the ability of the department of homeland security to reach out to faith communities, to reach out to civic groups, parents, community leaders in order to prevent isis from recruiting americans, which we believe is the greatest threat that we face. if i could just have 30 seconds and ask dr. elgawhary, what advice would you have for the department of homeland security as they outreach to a broad community to focus on the people radicalizing here. one strong piece of advice for the department of homeland security. >> work with us. >> thank you. >> senator carper, i will give all the witnesses a chance to just have a closing comment after we go to senator brooker. but i do want to ask nadia a

question. who helped you escape? microphone. >> translator: a muslim family. >> that answers your question. senator booker. >> senator carper, doctor, pointed question which you said help us basically help you. but we're looking at specific efforts that have been going on to activate lone wolves in the united states, cells in belgium and france. and this is a part of the war that obviously hits western countries right where they are, being preached at. where citizens of those countries and american citizens are finding the isis ideology and the perversion of islam so compelling that they are willing to take up arms against their fellow citizens in europe or in

the united states of america. and clearly we're doing a lot already, trying to empower local organizations in our communities, working with mosques. and we've had panels here where folks have given testimony about that. we now have allocated more resources toward that. i've been one of the people saying c.v.e. efforts should not be law enforcement focused, they should be focused on empowering communities, empowering those networks. if cve just becomes more police, more surveillance, more of that it's not going to really help us really deal with the core of the problem. and what i found so compelling about you is you pointed out so clearly in a way that i learned a lot from your testimony, so clearly that this is a perversion of islam, this is not islam we're fighting against, this is people that are using it to fuel hatred, violence, and as hassan hassan said, tactically for political objectives, to control territory and to expand the reach of their totalitarian

ends. but my concern is i still think we need to be doing more. frankly a lot more to counter that narrative. and i liked what you said in one of your responses that another paper, another 150-page paper is not that effective against the memes that you often see online that often seduce and pull in sort of vulnerable souls to this kind of terroristic activity. so i understand your sort of short answer to a short question. but i'm trying to figure out what are the specific strategies? and we're seeing some of them that are working. where you expose the fact that isil is killing far more muslims, killing far more sunnis than they are killing people in the west. that really begin to expose this so that those young people who might be susceptible to them see

them for who they are, naked before their eyes. and those are the kind of strategies that we need to start really investing in more. and so in the two minutes i left you in a three-minute preamble could you go really to the core of those things that if you were making the investments in the budget that we have to oversee where would you be placing those dollars more specifically? >> we have a very successful model in montgomery county called the brave model. it's a public-private partnership. we work with law enforcement. we work with the county executive. it's a really good program. it's getting national recognition. we're trying to export this model, train other people in other counties in the country that need this type of message. what i do in this model is i do a lot of the counternarrative. i would love to be able to be in a position where i can train other young muslim leaders in this country and our counterparts in western europe on what these points of -- i did the research. i'm happy for them to take it.

i'm happy for them to say they did it. maybe my colleagues will be upset about that. but i'm happy for people just to get the message out there. i also mentor people. people that might be on the spectrum that are referred to us by law enforcement. the school board. that might be on the spectrum. but there's no capacity for local government to deal with them. i sit down with them, i talk with them, i try to decipher is there a problem, are they on the spectrum? is it a mental health issue? we try to refer them out to countywide programs that will help them. this public-private partnership is working. it's working in our county. and i think if i had some say in the purse strings i would like to see us to be in a position to train other counties, first in the country where it's needed the most, and i would like us to go overseas, western european cities like brussels, london, and work with our counterparts over there to train them in this model. >> and that's a proactive strategy that often saves a lot of money on the raekt reaction we'd have to do with law enforcement or god forbid something happening.

today your all testimonies have been testimonies of courage. what you said, people should understand that you are risking your life by coming here, by speaking truth, by laying bare the evil that we are up against. and for that i am deeply grateful. >> thank you, senator booker. and you are right. just think of the evil that people are threatening somebody speaking the truth with their lives. again, i'd like to offer all the witnesses about a minute to just make a final comment. and we'll start with you, mr. hassan. >> we sort of covered most of the ground but i want to just emphasize that we all need to show isis, you know, show what it is -- what it does to the people that it claims to represent. we need to emphasize that these are its victims as much as the others are. and i think that needs to be

present in the media. it's not one person's war. it's everyone's war. >> mr. hassan. by the way, doctor, you got the harder questions because you've got "doctor" in front of your name. but doctor. >> it's actually at the end of the name. senator johnson, senator carper, thank you for the opportunity to address the committee, to submit testimony about something that is much more than work. this is something very personal. i think of my children when i come here and how the rhetoric, even though they're young, the political rhetoric unfortunately is something that scares them. and i hope that what we're doing here will help build a more resilient homeland so that the america they brew up in will be better than the america that i grew up in. thank you. >> mr. nahas. >> thank you, senators, for the opportunity for allowing me to speak in front of you. and every time that i have the chance to speak and talk about

my experience i always think about my counterparts that are still in danger, that are still under threat, especially because of their -- because they are different, because they are not as -- they don't conform with other people expectations. and i hope that the united states will take a stand and will be more active like in holding government and other actors on the ground accountable for their actions and doing something about this. thank you so much. >> thank you. miss murad. nadia. >> [ speaking foreign language ]. >> translator: thank you. and thank you also for all the attendees and witnesses who came here. i wish that we all can work together and stand up together to stop this terrorism.