they also had to agree to voluntarily repatriate to germany and to japan if the government decided they needed to be repatriated. the truth of the was humanely administered by the ins, but the special ward division of the united states used it as roosevelt primary prisoner exchange, it was the center of the prisoner exchange program. quick sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific. >> the white house summit on combating terrorism concluded thursday at the state department were international leaders spoke about efforts to counteract violent extremism within their borders. next, president obama's remarks. this is 25 minutes.

>> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome secretary of state john kerry. [applause] >> am pleased to share with you and i think all of you know this anyway, that the threat posed by violent extremism has been a top priority for president obama from the day that he became commander-in-chief. a very few months after he took office he spoke to the university in cairo and stated clearly that on his watch, the united states would relentlessly confront violent extremist pose a grave threat to our security because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths

reject, the killing of innocent men, women and children. he continued, it's my first duty as president to protect the american people. in the year since, president obama has proven that he understands the best way to do that is to protect not only the american people but also innocent people everywhere. and to work together as a global community to fight back against the violent extremism that attacks all of us. that's why he has literally spent the full measure of his six years as president rebuilding america's relationship with the rest of the world. that is why he has put a premium on personal diplomacy and consistently sought to act not as the world's policeman, but as the world's partner. it is why in the face of isil, he decided to mobilize a coalition to confront the network of murderers and thugs

which today includes more than 60 countries working along multiple lines of effort to destroy isil. it is why i'm understanding the scourge of violent extremism extends beyond any one group, he has convened so many partners hear from so many sectors and so many countries for this international summit. he understands that we have to do a lot more to eliminate this threat and he knows that we must do it together. ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states, barack obama. [applause] >> thank you very much.

thank you, john. good morning, everyone. i want to thank john kerry, not only for his introduction, but for the outstanding leadership of american diplomacy. john is tireless. if he has not visited your country yet, he will soon. and i want to thank you and everybody here at the state department for organizing and hosting this ministerial today. mr. secretary general, distinguished guests, we are joined by representatives from governments, because we all have a responsibility to ensure the security, the prosperity and the human rights of our citizens. and we're joined by leaders of civil society, including many faith leaders, because civil society -- reflecting the views and the voices of citizens -- is vital to the success of any country. i thank all of you and i welcome all of you. we come together from more than 60 countries from every

continent. we speak different languages born of different races and ethnic groups, belong to different religions. we are here today because we are united against the scourge of violent extremism and terrorism. as we speak, isil is terrorizing the people of syria and iraq and engaging in unspeakable cruelty. the wanton murder of children, the enslavement and rape of women, threatening religious minorities with genocide beheading hostages. isil-linked terrorists murdered egyptians in the sinai peninsula, and their slaughter of egyptian christians in libya has shocked the world.

beyond the region, we've seen deadly attacks in ottawa sydney, paris, and now copenhagen. elsewhere, israelis have endured the tragedy of terrorism for decades. pakistan's taliban has mounted a long campaign of violence against the pakistani people that now tragically includes the massacre of more than 100 schoolchildren and their teachers. from somalia, al-shabaab terrorists have launched attacks across east africa. in nigeria and neighboring countries, boko haram kills and kidnaps men, women and children. at the united nations in september, i called on the international community to come together and eradicate violent extremism. and i challenged countries to

come to the general assembly this fall with concrete steps we can take together. and i'm grateful for all of you for answering this call. yesterday at the white house, we welcomed community groups from the united states, and some from your countries, to focus on how we can empower communities to protect their families and friends and neighbors from violent ideologies and recruitment. and over the coming months, many of your countries will host summits to build on the work here and to prepare for the general assembly. today, i want to suggest some areas where i believe we can focus on as governments. first, we must remain unwavering in our fight against terrorist organizations. and in afghanistan, our coalition is focused on training and assisting afghan forces, and we'll continue to conduct counterterrorism missions against the remnants of al qaeda

in the tribal regions. when necessary, the united states will continue to take action against al qaeda affiliates in places like yemen and somalia. we will continue to work with partners to help them build up their security forces so that they can prevent ungoverned spaces where terrorists find safe haven, and so they can push back against groups like al-shabaab and boko haram. in iraq and syria, our coalition of some 60 nations, including arab nations, will not relent in our mission to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. and as a result of a separate ministerial here yesterday, many of our governments will be deepening our cooperation against foreign terrorist fighters by sharing more information and making it harder for fighters to travel to and from syria and iraq. related to this, and as i said at the united nations last fall,

nations need to break the cycles of conflict -- especially sectarian conflict -- that have become magnets for violent extremism. in syria, assad's war against his own people and deliberate stoking of sectarian tensions helped to fuel the rise of isil. and in iraq, with the failure of the previous government to govern in an inclusive manner, it helped to pave the way for isil's gains there. the syrian civil war will only end when there is an inclusive political transition and a government that serves syrians of all ethnicities and religions. and across the region, the terror campaigns between sunnis and shia will only end when major powers address their differences through dialogue and not through proxy wars.

so countering violent extremism begins with political, civic and religious leaders rejecting sectarian strife. second, we have to confront the warped ideologies espoused by terrorists like al qaeda and isil, especially their attempt to use islam to justify their violence. i discussed this at length yesterday. these terrorists are desperate for legitimacy. and all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like isil somehow represent islam, because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative. at the same time, we must acknowledge that groups like al qaeda and isil are deliberately targeting their propaganda to

muslim communities, particularly muslim youth. and muslim communities including scholars and clerics therefore have a responsibility to push back, not just on twisted interpretations of islam, but also on the lie that we are somehow engaged in a clash of civilizations; that america and the west are somehow at war with islam or seek to suppress muslims; or that we are the cause of every ill in the middle east. that narrative sometimes extends far beyond terrorist organizations. that narrative becomes the foundation upon which terrorists build their ideology and by which they try to justify their violence. and that hurts all of us

including islam, and especially muslims, who are the ones most likely to be killed. obviously, there is a complicated history between the middle east, the west. and none of us i think should be immune from criticism in terms of specific policies, but the notion that the west is at war with islam is an ugly lie. and all of us, regardless of our faith, have a responsibility to reject it. at the same time, former extremists have the opportunity to speak out, speak the truth about terrorist groups, and oftentimes they can be powerful messengers in debunking these terrorist ideologies. one said, “this wasn't what we came for, to kill other muslims.” those voices have to be amplified. and governments have a role to play.

at minimum, as a basic first step, countries have a responsibility to cut off funding that fuels hatred and corrupts young minds and endangers us all. we need to do more to help lift up voices of tolerance and peace, especially online. that's why the united states is joining, for example, with the uae to create a new digital communications hub to work with religious and civil society and community leaders to counter terrorist propaganda. within the u.s. government, our efforts will be led by our new coordinator of counterterrorism communications -- and i'm grateful that my envoy to the organization of islamic cooperation, rashad hussain, has agreed to serve in this new

role. so the united states will do more to help counter hateful ideologies, and today i urge your nations to join us in this urgent work. third, we must address the grievances that terrorists exploit, including economic grievances. as i said yesterday, poverty alone does not cause a person to become a terrorist, any more than poverty alone causes someone to become a criminal. there are millions, billions of people who are poor and are law-abiding and peaceful and tolerant, and are trying to advance their lives and the opportunities for their families. but when people -- especially young people -- feel entirely trapped in impoverished communities, where there is no order and no path for advancement, where there are no educational opportunities, where there are no ways to support families, and no escape from

injustice and the humiliations of corruption -- that feeds instability and disorder, and makes those communities ripe for extremist recruitment. and we have seen that across the middle east and we've seen it across north africa. so if we're serious about countering violent extremism, we have to get serious about confronting these economic grievances. here, at this summit, the united states will make new commitments to help young people, including in muslim communities, to forge new collaborations in entrepreneurship and science and technology. all our nations can reaffirm our commitment to broad-based development that creates growth and jobs, not just for the few at the top, but for the many. we can step up our efforts against corruption, so a person can go about their day and an

entrepreneur can start a business without having to pay a bribe. and as we go forward, let's commit to expanding education, including for girls. expanding opportunity, including for women. nations will not truly succeed without the contributions of their women. this requires, by the way, wealthier countries to do more. but it also requires countries that are emerging and developing to create structures of governance and transparency so that any assistance provided actually works and reaches people. it's a two-way street. fourth, we have to address the political grievances that terrorists exploit.

again, there is not a single perfect causal link, but the link is undeniable. when people are oppressed, and human rights are denied -- particularly along sectarian lines or ethnic lines -- when dissent is silenced, it feeds violent extremism. it creates an environment that is ripe for terrorists to exploit. when peaceful, democratic change is impossible, it feeds into the terrorist propaganda that violence is the only answer available. and so we must recognize that lasting stability and real security require democracy. that means free elections where people can choose their own future, and independent judiciaries that uphold the rule of law, and police and security forces that respect human rights, and free speech and

freedom for civil society groups. and it means freedom of religion -- because when people are free to practice their faith as they choose, it helps hold diverse societies together. and finally, we have to ensure that our diverse societies truly welcome and respect people of all faiths and backgrounds, and leaders set the tone on this issue. groups like al qaeda and isil peddle the lie that some of our countries are hostile to muslims. meanwhile, we've also seen, most recently in europe, a rise in inexcusable acts of anti-semitism, or in some cases, anti-muslim sentiment or anti-immigrant sentiment. when people spew hatred towards others -- because of their faith

or because they're immigrants -- it feeds into terrorist narratives. if entire communities feel they can never become a full part of the society in which they reside, it feeds a cycle of fear and resentment and a sense of injustice upon which extremists prey. and we can't allow cycles of suspicions to tear at the fabric of our countries. so we all recognize the need for more dialogues across countries and cultures; those efforts are indeed important. but what's most needed today perhaps, are more dialogues within countries -- not just across faiths, but also within faiths. violent extremists and terrorists thrive when people of different religions or sects pull away from each other and are able to isolate each other and label them as “they” as opposed to “us;” something

separate and apart. so we need to build and bolster bridges of communication and trust. terrorists traffic in lies and stereotypes about others -- other religions, other ethnic groups. so let's share the truth of our faiths with each other. terrorists prey upon young impressionable minds. so let's bring our youth together to promote understanding and cooperation. that's what the united states will do with our virtual exchange program -- named after ambassador chris stevens -- to connect 1 million young people from america and the middle east and north africa for dialogue. young people are taught to hate. it doesn't come naturally to them. we, adults, teach them.

i'd like to close by speaking very directly to a painful truth that's part of the challenge that brings us here today. in some of our countries including the united states, muslim communities are still small, relative to the entire population, and as a result, many people in our countries don't always know personally of somebody who is muslim. so the image they get of muslims or islam is in the news. and given the existing news cycle, that can give a very distorted impression. a lot of the bad, like terrorists who claim to speak for islam, that's absorbed by the general population. not enough of the good -- the more than 1 billion people around the world who do

represent islam, and are doctors and lawyers and teachers, and neighbors and friends. so we have to remember these muslim men and women -- the young palestinian working to build understanding and trust with israelis, but also trying to give voice to her people's aspirations. the muslim clerics working for peace with christian pastors and priests in nigeria and the central african republic to put an end to the cycle of hate. civil society leaders in indonesia, one of the world's largest democracies. parliamentarians in tunisia working to build one of the world's newest democracies. business leaders in india, with one of the world's largest muslim populations. entrepreneurs unleashing new innovations in places like malaysia.

health workers fighting to save lives from polio and from ebola in west africa. and volunteers who go to disaster zones after a tsunami or after an earthquake to ease suffering and help families rebuild. muslims who have risked their lives as human shields to protect coptic churches in egypt and to protect christians attending mass in pakistan and who have tried to protect synagogues in syria. the world hears a lot about the terrorists who attacked charlie hebdo in paris, but the world has to also remember the paris police officer, a muslim, who died trying to stop them. the world knows about the attack on the jews at the kosher supermarket in paris; we need to recall the worker at that market, a muslim, who hid jewish customers and saved their lives. and when he was asked why he did it, he said, “we are brothers. it's not a question of jews or

christians or muslims. we're all in the same boat, and we have to help each other to get out of this crisis.” distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, i thank you for being here today. we come from different countries and different cultures and different faiths, but it is useful for us to take our wisdom from that humble worker who engaged in heroic acts under the most severe of circumstances. we are all in the same boat. we have to help each other. in this work, you will have a strong partner in me and the united states of america. thank you very much. [applause]

>> on friday president obama addresses the winter meeting of the democratic national committee in washington dc. the conference focuses on the party strategy after the loss in the midterm election. like coverage starting at 11:10 a.m. eastern, here on c-span. secretary of state john kerry and u.n. secretary general ban ki-moon addressed international leaders at the white house summit on violent extremism. the remark focused on the real causes of extremism and ways to address those who feel marginalized. they spoke about 25 minutes.

>> they told me i must go with them. they took me to a place where there were other hostages in a camp with wire. you always think it will happen to other, but not to you. i was very afraid. >> we just arrived. suddenly the booms started. in that time, i don't know if it was an earthquake or what. everything is very dark. i realized that my hand was burning and i tried to put out

the fire. it was very traumatic for me. every few days you have to change your bandage. i had 42% burns on my body. my hand and my back were burned. >> i should have taken the train with them. the night before, a friend of mine phoned me and told me she was going to pick me up at a different station so that i could wake up later. my brother took the train. [screaming] ♪ >> [speaking foreign language]

[explosion] [speaking foreign language]

>> [speaking foreign language] >> [speaking foreign language] >> this is bona rasheed. she is filmed enjoying summer camp. only hours later, she would be killed with 68 others. >> [speaking foreign language] >> good morning.

that video very briefly shows some of the images of terror and much of the rationale for our being here today. nobody wants the good to die young. we all have an enormous obligation and responsibility to find the ways to meet this scourge. this is the ministerial component of the several days in washington. i want to thank everybody. i know that the schedule of any minister in government today is enormously challenging. so for all of you to come here , and spend this much time is really a reflection of the deep commitment and concern about the challenges that we face. at the white house yesterday local practitioners and civil society leaders from around the world gathered to highlight the

community-led efforts that can prevent terrorist recruitment and infiltration. there has been a silly debate in the media in the last days about what you have to do. you have to do everything. you have to take the people off the battlefield who are there today, but you are stupid if all you do is do that and you don't prevent more people from going to the battlefield. so we have a broad challenge , here. mostly, it is to talk about facts and realities. and to take those realities and put them into a real strategy that we all implement together. no one country, no one army, no one group is going to be able to respond to this adequately. we see that in the numbers of countries that are now being touched by it. our goal today is to build on the discussions of the last two days by looking at ways both to address the most alarming

threats that we face, but also to get practical. to strengthen the role of civil society. in particular, women, youth, and victims. and to ensure that civil society has the space to be able to operate. we need to identify and amplify credible voices, expanding religious and other education that promotes tolerance, peace and respect. for all religions. we need to address the social, economic, and political marginalization part of this challenge. when i was recently in a country in northern africa, the prime minister there told me about the challenge of a certain portion of their population where young people are proselytized and captured at a very young age paid money in some cases. once their minds are full of

this invective and distortion, they don't need to pay them anymore. what was chilling was that this foreign minister said that they don't have a five-year strategy. they have a 35-year strategy. we have to come together and say, what is our strategy? how are we going to respond? our goal today is to take this chance, to think broadly about how to prevent violent ideologies from taking hold and how to prevent terrorist networks, such as isil or boko haram, or any group from linking up with aggrieved groups elsewhere and how to prevent them from there by expanding their influence. this morning, i expect that the secretary-general and president obama will urge us to push ahead as far and as fast as we can to work on the -- to develop the work streams that we have

already identified. some of our efforts are going to take place in public gatherings such as this. i think everybody here understands that much of this work is going to be done quietly, without fanfare, in classrooms, in community centers, in workplaces, in houses of worship, on urban street corners, and in village markets. in the months to come, we will have regional summits and i'm sure we will have other events which will gauge the progress and measure the next steps. in new york this fall, our leaders will come together as a group. but between now and then, we must all contribute and our collaboration, cooperation, must be constant. we need to remember that our adversaries don't have to cope with distractions. they don't have a broad set of responsibilities to fulfill. they don't have the same

institutional responsibilities that we do to meet the needs of our citizens. terror is their obsession. it is what they do. if we let them, their purpose -- singleness of purpose could wind up giving them a comparative advantage. with the images of recent outbreaks fresh in our minds everybody here knows we simply cannot let that happen. we have to match their commitment. we have to leave them with no advantage at all. this morning, we will begin with a session devoted to a single word. why. why do people make, what to many of us would seem to be the wrong choice, and become the kind of terrorists we are seeing? it is a question we have to approach with humility but also with determination.

because you cannot defeat what you don't understand. certainly, there is no single answer. in our era, poisonous ideas can come from almost anywhere. from parents, teachers, friends, preachers, politicians. from the pretty woman on a radical website who lures people, or the man in the next cell who proselytizes while in prison. they might grow from pictures seen on the nightly news or from acts of discrimination or repression that you don't think much about on the day of occurrence, but which come back to haunt. it can come from the desire to avenge the death of a loved one. in some cases, it might come from a lost job or from the contrast between one family's empty dinner plate and a fancy restaurant's lavish menu. the poison might even come from

within. in the form of rebellion against anonymity, the desire to belong to a group, people who want a moment of visibility and identity. or the hunger for black and white answers to problems that are very complex in a remarkably more complicated world. we can all understand the search for meaning and doubts about authority, because at one time or another, most of us have been there. it is a huge leap between personal disquiet and committing murder. mayhem. so let there be no confusion or doubt. what everyone's individual experience might be, there are no grounds in history, religion, ideologies, psychology politics, or economic disadvantage or personal ambition, that will ever justify the killing of children, the kidnapping or rape of teenage

girls, the slaughter of unarmed civilians. these atrocities cannot be rationalized. they cannot be excused. they must be opposed and they must be stopped. whether in classrooms or houses of worship or over the internet or on tv, our message is very straightforward. to anyone who is in doubt, we can say with conviction, to have no doubt. there is a better way to serve god, to protect loved ones, to defend the community, to seek justice, to become known, a better way to live than by embracing violent extremism. in fact, there is no worse way to do any of those things. our challenge then is not one of marshaling facts, because the facts are wholly on our side.

our task is to encourage the most credible leaders and spokespersons to penetrate the barrier of terrorist lies and to do so over and over again. we have to support the right people saying the right things all the time. that also means that we have to be crystal clear in separating what we oppose from what we should always be eager to defend. we have to be steadfast advocates of religious freedom supporters of the right to peaceful dissent, opponents of bigotry in every form, and builders of opportunity for all. friends, our arms are open. our minds are open to the ideas. a partnership against violent extremism that we are assembling has room for anyone who is willing to respect the fundamental rights and dignity of other human beings.

so, it is appropriate this morning that we will be privileged to hear from the secretary-general of the united nations. an organization whose founding purpose is to encourage us all to practice tolerance and live together in peace. through its efforts, the peace-building and conflict resolution development, the u.n. has been an invaluable contributor to the long-term battle against international terror. and the global partnership that is represented here today, this effort is not something taking place outside of the u.n. this is to support u.n. resolution and the efforts we have been part of for so long. in 2006, ban ki-moon was chosen to be the leader of the u.n.. ban-ki moon has been the voice of healing and reconciliation. despite the fact that the job is

nearly impossible, he has become known across the globe for his energy and commitment. it is my honor to present to you the secretary-general of the united nations. [applause] >> secretary of state john kerry, ministers, excellencies and ladies and gentlemen. i thank president barack obama and secretary of state john kerry for convening this very important gathering on preventing violent extremism. thank you for your leadership and strong commitment, and eloquent speech and giving us a good way forward so that we can work together to defeat this apparent extremism and terrorism and discuss how we can build

upon what we have been doing so far. addressing this profound challenge in a manner that solves, rather than multiplies the problem, may be the greatest test the human family faces in the 21st century. a new generation of terroristic groups is a grave threat to international peace. these extra must -- ex tremists are pushing a deliberate strategy of shock. beheadings, burnings, designed to polarize and terrorize and divide us. the victims are as diverse as humankind itself.

let us recognize that the vast majority of the victims are muslims across a broad arc of disasters. women and girls are subject to appalling systematic abuse rape, forced marriage, sexual slavery, and other unspeakable horrors. no cause or grievance can justify such crimes. i commend member states for their will to defeat terrorist groups. we must do all we can to neutralize the threat. that means responding decisively. it also means being mindful of the people.

many years of our experience have proven that shortsighted policies failed leadership and , an utter disregard for humanity and human rights have caused tremendous frustration and anger on the part of the people for whom we serve. we will never find our way by discarding our moral compass. we need cool heads, we need common sense, we must never let fear rule. ladies and gentlemen, i see four imperatives for our current efforts to protect people. and uphold human dignity. first, preventing violent extremism demands that we get to the root. looking for the motivation is a

notoriously difficult exercise. yet we know that poisonous ideologies do not emerge from thin air. oppression, corruption, and injustice are greenhouses for resentment. extremist leaders cultivate the alienation. they, themselves, are pretenders, criminals, gangsters, on the far fringes of the faith they claim to represent. yes, they prey on young people without jobs. or even, without a sense of belonging. they exploit the social media. extremists have a strategy for hate. we need a comprehensive strategy for harmony and peace.

second, preventing violent extremism and promoting human rights go hand-in-hand. time and again, we have seen the most effective recruiting agents for extremists are the very actions taken against them. often counterterrorism , strategies combine elements of -- lack basic elements of due process and respect for the law. sweeping definitions of terrorism are often used to criminalize legitimate actions of opposition groups, civil organizations, and human rights organizations. governments should not lose the fight against terrorism and extremism for the sake of attacking critics.

we must not fall into contempt. preventing violent extremism third, requires an all-around approach. military operations are crucial to confront the real threat. but bullets are not the silver bullet. missiles may kill terrorists but good governance kills terrorism. we must remember this. missiles make terrorists, but good governance kills terrorism. human rights and political participation are among our most powerful weapons. we must also teach our children compassion, diversity, and empathy.

education should play a decisive role in school and home alike. winning the battle for the minds of future generations. fourth, preventing violent extremism is a global challenge. violent extremism is not a north-south or east-west issue. it is not confined to a particular region or religion. it transcends borders and is present across the world. no single country or organization can defeat terrorism and extremism on its own. all countries along with regional and international organizations, as well as political, religious, academic and civil leaders, should join hands to forge a multifaceted response that respects

international human rights and humanitarian laws. the united nations' strategy , adopted by the member states by consensus in 2006, provides a comprehensive framework. the security council resolution was adopted last september under chapter seven of the charter in a meeting presided over by president barack obama. it has put strength behind our collective efforts. the united nations is working to build bridges between people and governments. make no mistake, when leaders call on communities who isolate themselves or run away extremists rejoice. i am also concerned by

extremists feeding off one another in a spiral of intolerance. the community must pull together, with collective wisdom. the united nations system stands ready to work on a comprehensive, multi-state plan of action to prevent violent extremism that will be prevent -- presented to the full membership of the u.n. general assembly later this year. excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, as a's -- a first step of the plan, i, myself, as president of the general assembly of the u.n., in cooperation with the u.n. alliance of civilizations, plan to convene a special event in the coming months that will bring together faith leaders from all around the world to promote neutral understanding

and reconciliation. we will utilize the platform of the united nations to send a powerful message of tolerance and solidarity, and reconciliation. secretary kerry, ministers, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. there is much pain in today's world. in schools offices bombs have claimed lives every day. it can be overwhelming. it is certainly heartbreaking. at the same time, i take heart at the acts of heroism and solidarity that are so open on display at times like this. i take heart when i met a muslim spiriting jewish patrons to

safety in a jewish grocery store, or when christians help muslims flee carnage in a central african republic, or during marches of solidarity in copenhagen. that is the heart we need. our future depends on it. i count on your strong leadership to defeat terrorism and extremism. you can count on the united nations. i thank you very much. [applause] >> on friday, the washington institute for near east policy hosted a discussion on increasing number of foreign fighters joining isis. speakers including the former commander who oversaw detainee operations in iraq. live coverage starts at noon

eastern on c-span two. next former officials from the obama and bush administrations talk about countering extremism. this is about one hour. [applause] >> it is always a compliment to me to meet the crowd this size when weather is like it is. we are pleased to have you. we try to stay on top of the news, but i don't think we have ever been as on top of the news when you put together a panel on extreme terrorist -- terrorist extremism? is that appropriate? we will talk about what to call it in a moment. just two days of this over at the white house, and that is where we want to start.

one's a rot he is senior adviser -- juan zarati is a senior analyst for cbs news and event -- visiting lecturer at harvard. he served as deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism and the bush administration. he was at the treasury department before he came to that job and he is also a former -- i know this, he is also a former federal prosecutor who served on terrorism prosecution teams prior to september 11, including the investigation of the uss cole. we also have the adjunct senior fellow on the council on foreign relations. she is the first ever special representative to muslim

communities from the government. she has been a political appointee in the george h.w. bush, george w. bush, and barack obama administrations, appointed special rep to muslim communities in 2009 by secretary of state hillary clinton, she has traveled aboard -- to more than 80 countries and launched initiatives. she is the main architect of the women in public service project in january 2013. she was awarded the secretaries distinguished honor award. at my left, senior national security correspondent for the daily beast. before that, she was the pentagon correspondent, national security reporter, and a bureau chief for newspapers throughout the middle east and cairo. she has covered the war in iraq,

she did have one stint as their baghdad bureau chief, and she has just in all over that part of the world and all over these issues. what we start with here, is this summit they had at the white house. i would like to hear from juan. what is the headline here? >> the white house was trying to draw attention to the notion that the problems we are facing around the world, the cause of terrorism, link the al qaeda to the islamic state has an ideological underpinning. the headline is, the white house itself was willing to gather people around this issue. in many ways, the obama administration came in to power not wanting to talk about the issues or focus on them. the reality of the world, the nature of this movement, has, i

think, forced this. the headline to me, is that the white house is committed to providing leadership on this issue, and is talking about the issue not as some bygone issue of the past, a creation of prior grievances, but a generational struggle that is impacting muslim communities around the world. from my vantage point, it is the recognition that this is a long-term struggle and challenge , that it is president obama himself recognizing that and galvanizing interest to it. >> what you see is as the headline? >> i agree. it is truly striking. what he just said about the ideological -- divide -- violent and nonviolent ideologies. what is basically building the ego system from which the bad guys are recruiting. i think you did a pretty good job of explaining that the

reasons why that ideology, those violent and nonviolent ideologies, are important. the other thing that was really striking, the president started off his administration very carefully looking at muslims around the world and in his a do not -- inauguration speech he inserted a creed to muslims to say, i am working with you. he goes to cairo and gives the cairo speech. here we are in 2015, and this is the speech he gives. guess what? the world is a dangerous place. muslims, you need to help me lead in this effort. that pivot, that change, that texture is important to me. the final thing is, and i think we will get more into this, but when you look at the creation of this white house summit, the three days of events and how they did this, they really tried to point the communities and say

government cannot do this alone we must do this in partnership with you. and they underscore the fact that hey, guess what? not only can government not do it alone, we need the private sector to help us get these ideas off the ground. so these are some of the themes that i think came into the conversation. >> nancy you always concentrate on the military part of this a lot of the time. also, you have seen this from overseas as well as here. how do you think this will be received in other parts of the world? >> i think it is interesting we are having this discussion seven months into a u.s. military campaign. the language, the terminology seven months after striking in iraq and syria and defining this as the islamic state as a threat that demands military action. now, we are talking about the terminology in terms of what it is. it is interesting to me that that is the direction the conversation has taken.

what i am leery about our how we use the term "islamic", if we put too much focus on the discussion, i fear we are playing into the game of the very people that the west is looking to spite. the battle of islam at the same time, if that discussion does not happen, we will not have an understanding of what we are confronting. how much is this about a hijacked version of islam? how much is about poverty? it is part of a bigger discussion. for the region to not take it as about islam, that has to be part of the broader discussion. >> i want to talk about what some of the resource will -- leaders are doing.

>> in some ways it is very much like groundhog day. the conversations are loudly the same. we struggled mightily to talk about how you describe the ideology. the idea that you do not want to offend your allies. i'm describe the threat in terms of a war on islam. you have to be sensitive about this. keep in mind, president bush

visited the mosque to make these points. we had mighty debates. a speech that the president wanted to give. the president said, some call this islamic radicalism. this is different than the religion of islam. he goes on to explain what that is. the purpose of the speech was to define clearly what the ideological paintings were about. not a lot of people focused on that but it is important to focus on the language now because the obama administration

is struggling with how do have that divide between not the fact it is the way the groups to identify themselves, the way they radicalize, think about their own political agenda. part of their mythology. how do you confront it or undermine it without recognized in the islamic component? that is a challenge for the u.s.. >> i could almost hear obama making that speech. >> as somebody who once said, walking through not how to offend was important. let me put historical context in this. we were thinking about, what is the history of the country? how can we talk about that so that muslims don't feel that

they are victims or look at them as a special threat group? how do we look at this in terms of the messaging to the communities around the world? and what are the hopes -- clips the extremists are going to play over and over when the president says something? it is a careful dance you have to do. my former title was special representative to muslim communities. i cannot tell you how much time we spent on that title. it was not muslim world. the bad guys want you to believe there is a special world in which muslims live. to unpack that or push back, the lexicon matters. in the current moment it is so partisan that nobody is thinking

through the elements of speech and what matters. the final thing i will say is something the president alluded to. a domestic audience. one of the things we were thinking about is how do you talk to the american public about the role of islam in america when most americans don't know that history. they don't know that it came here at the time of the slaves. they have not heard every president since the founding fathers speak with dignity. when people are asking, is america at war with islam, or going to the clash of civilizations article, you must have your data and facts. we must have and to know the history to be proud of who we are.

and thank goodness the way every single president has spoken about it with dignity consistently. the part that i would like to know more about is while we are almost counting homey many angels can dance on the head of a pen or written across the world, they are cutting heads off. we always seem to be surprised by the events. all of a sudden, there was something called isil. mayor cutting peoples has off. -- heads off. when the jordanians pilot was burnt to death the king led the charge.

they executed to prisoners. there was a reason that the president does not put on a military uniform. because that is how the government is set up. what concerns me is when these events happen, we seem overtaken by events and of the president has something scheduled for the holiday, he goes off. congress takes off for the regular vacation. and everybody says, we will debate about that when we get back. that is what we are committed getting, not what we are going to call this. the president said, i'm not very good at the optics. does that concern you? that people in the part of the

world of the the understand -- don't understand we take it seriously? >> a number of points. one of the reasons we are seeing this over and over again. it is literally the same people. in the case of iraq, the islamic state. it was born out of al qaeda and iraq. when you look at the mosul campaign it was very similar to that they lost against u.s. troops. in this effort to say we are done and don't want to spend more money, there is a premature call of victory. it ends up being a fragile victory. you have a region not dealing with the issues. you can keep fighting, but there are still governance all caps --

problems. if you mix jihad e-groups together and then release them five thing years later, how do you have any hope of ending the problem? it is this balance between how much you put in the military and the systemic problem that have defined the regions for the last 50 years. that is one of the reasons we tend to be surprised. what we learned in iraq is the peace be claimed in 2011 was very fragile. it is not something that you declare victory on. if the war in syria happened cleanly, we would still be dealing with this. you have fighters coming back.

second and third order effects. that is if it ended tomorrow. we are so eager to hissay something is done. rather than to recognize this is something that woman's best -- that will manifest itself. >> >> you raised an important point that this ideology manifests itself in the real world. we think of this as a long-term challenge. how do you undermine the message or an oculi at risk committees -- inoculate at risk communities. the reality is, in the current environment, the ideology is manifested in virulent and violent ways.

in the first instance, you have groups who realize they can have strategic impacts. that have much water impacts on the debate around pluralism. accelerating jewish migration out of france. visit -- these were three guys. look at the strategic impact if they had. the longer the caliphate exists in syria and iraq, the more attractive this narrative is too young people in muslim communities around world. the longer we allow the state to exist, that perpetuates the ideological problem. you have hotspots where ideology is emerging. human rights and uses.

-- abuses. sexual slavery child soldiers. you also have things like the emergence of polio where extremists have taken hold like western pakistan or syria in an -- and the desecration of cultural heritage. you are talking about cultural genocide led by these groups because they are trying to change the shape of history and identity. the thing i worry about all the dimensions that are happening are important. there are real world manifestations to how the ideology is x-ray threatening humanity. we haven't figure out -- is actually threatening humanity. we have not figured out how to react to it. >> what is the message these people are putting out? the data points are consistent

from argentina to zanzibar. they have a crisis of identity. a generation growing up every single day 2001 with the word islam online or off-line. it has had profound effect and how they think about themselves. the difference between culture and religion. asking themselves questions that any teen ureter -- any teenager is going to ask. the loudest megaphone of answers comes from the bad guys. tom i -- tell me why my family does not eat of all meat. -- halal meet. a mom who says i don't want you to play with that kind of muslim committed you are seeing a shift in the way the world will be. it is colossal. one fourth of the world is

muslim, 1.6 billion people. 62% is under the age of 30. imagine how all these things are going to impact. what is the appeal? i finally have an identity i can understand. we may reject it and say it is horrible. for the person who is struggling or trying to belong, that wants to feel something, it is not about how rich or poor they are. it is about how they feel about themselves. i have seen it and witnessed it firsthand. to your point about the thing that scares you. the thing that scares me is the inability of us to connect the dots. we are so focused on the region. the partnerships we have with a particular country. everything else does not matter. when you come back from the mall visor central asia and you are overwhelmed with what you are hearing. -- the mall dives or central --

the maldives or central asia and you are overwhelmed with what you are hearing fifth syria is on fire. we dismiss it. the maldives? give me a break. it matters because this generation's ideas are connected with each other. some girl and denver -- in denver up and says, i get it. >> in the early years after 9/11 we treated this as a terrorist threat and we had to go after big fish. that there were just a few people and we got them, we would take care of it. you're talking about the little fish. in egypt, it is hard for us to picture it here. the average egyptian was on $200 a month.

it's a country that was so hopeful after the arab spring. that hope had been sustaining people for decades. that there would be changed. you have a president in egypt that has brought back the tour torry all -- dictatorial practices and justifies it with the on growing threat. you have people -- it is so fragile. a persistent campaign. the minute somebody feels the vulnerability, they are pushing and pushing. you go from not having hope in a country where it feels hopeless to being offered the greatest opportunity ever. from being valueless to

defending the faith. they don't start out angry or ambitious. you see it with kids in the muslim brotherhood. someone is giving them a purpose and appeal. i have interviewed them. i talked to some kids who started to join groups right before i left. you could see the sadness. they were 19 and 20-year-old kids. they would talk about their rage. they tried to blow this up. they say, i feel rejected by my country. this was not some push to be ideological. they are kids. you could tell just a little attention could have turned it the other way. >> what should we be doing that we're not doing?

i think we need to amplify what is already in the ecosystem. there are a lot of credible voices willing to confront and counteract the ideology and narrative and movement. it has not taken scale. this summit may be a helpful catalyst. you have seen some of that movement. the network. they are out there. amplifying that. funding those. to my mind, identifying where the ideology is manifesting and confronting it. we have to find creative wheeze -- ways where the ideology is taking hold. finding out who the right actors are to do it. fermenting a grassroots

campaign. it has to be a global effort. >> i would agree. i would say on the community level, it is a 360 degree thing. you cannot do things in fits and starts. there is a group in brussels or toulouse. we can expect a little glass of nice things that are happening. there needs to be a drumbeat all day, every day, in your face. to pull kids away from that ideology. a lot of people get uncomfortable about that. it has to be a consistent generational all day thing they are seeing. if we only say, this is happening because there are going to be foreign fighters or this is only happening because we are now in this part of the world, you are missing things.

the thing that scares me is not the foreign fighters. you have to be able to poison that ecosystem for that growth to happen. the other piece we have not done a good job about it all, not just our country but around the world, combined world, combined what we no about how kids get radicalized with the mental health brokers that can help those kids get out of that process, not when they are early radicalized. i am talking about the conveyor belt that leads them up. >> talk about the military situation. what is going on right now? >> egypt on monday launched airstrikes in libya. egypt has an isis problem on both sides. in the sinai in the east, the population has been ostracized for decades. they don't get government

resources, homes have been raided and destroyed, certainly after 2013. and so there are a lot of fighters coming in, already radicalized. meanwhile, you have a collapsed state state with competing governments backed by rival militias and egypt has been a -- hankering to go into libya and take care of the problem because a lot of them trouble from libya to the sinai, literally a direct -- you can see it happening. they were eager to do something about it because they see it as an existential threat, and in many ways it is. at the same time i would argue this has been exploited to justify his own government, the

way he took power and to mitigate those who say that this is not the state that we wanted to emerge from the arab spring. they were looking for a way to get into this and take on libya. and then the video was released showing the beheading of 21 people, most of them egyptians 90 million people in egypt. a lot of them are workers. christians, remarkable that the at created national outrage, sectarian differences defining these were gone. you can understand, just outrage that this could happen. egypt does these strikes, adl strikes. -- a day of strikes. and egypt we will say officially it's not a part of the us coalition.

we have an isis problem in north africa. they are asking the us for help. getting a mixed response. things have been tense since the overthrown. you have in egypt egypt that is trying to confront the spread of isis. at the same time, a tense elation ship. the u.s. military response is that we should not exaggerate the isis threat. they are exploiting the jihadi groups already there. they are using isis rather than actively joining the islamic state. it's true now, but it can change

quickly when you have two ungoverned spaces that are riddled, riddled, with jihadists. >> how would you sum up where we are in this? i must say, i'm the only one that remembers vietnam. vietnam was the good news that we always got, it was never quite as good as we were told that it was, and the bad news was always worse than we were told it was. how do you think the situation is right now? are we winning this war? are we holding them in place? we just had yemen happen. where are we? >> i think i think we have to check ourselves. these aren't 10-foot giants.

there are conditions in the the environment that play against them. but there is an ideological unity that ties the groups. the pentagon statements are almost in opposite to what the problem is. it doesn't matter what better -- banner these groups are flying. the fact that they can operate and are effective is really the problem. and i think what you have is the allure of foreign fighters. now numbering over 20,000, lured by the pied piper dimension of the social media, attractiveness of this narrative, some of which is just heroic identity, and really we are facing a much more

dangerous and diverse environment. counterterrorism officials. they talk about a more diverse threat from a geography, nationality, and group perspective. the challenge to your earlier question is how you get ahead of the problem, anticipate, perhaps even predict where the new challenges and threats will come. that is difficult. that is what the intelligence community is asked to do. from a policy perspective the challenge is how you shape the environment. we are a long way from seeing the end goal. is the threat to the us homeland today greater or less? >> i think it's greater for a lot of reasons. i want to say one thing before i get to that.

we know the tools that we need to scale up and mobilize. then there are the tools governments must do. governments around the world. it's going to be controversial. there are countries in the world, saudi arabia, building an ecosystem that is helping this ideology thrive, and we have tried to parse this conversation in a thousand different ways. as far as i am concerned until we are honest about what is going on we can get past it. what there doing on the ground not just talking about textbooks. i'm talking about building a systematic approach globally that is changing the environment for millennials so that within one generation they are moving in a particular way. we never talk about this, but

for me if your going to be serious about stopping this you have to name the fact we want to win this ideological war. if you are committed to winning it you need to be committed to talking about why the bad guys are so advanced. there are are many elements. diversity of issues including, by the way, if you are thinking down the pike, you want a bunch from the west. you have done a good job of bringing them in. they have done a good job of moving women in a different direction. we should have been on top of catching up with that. for me from looking down the pike and stop being so politically sensitive about what we're doing because if we're talking about defending the homeland we can't defend the homeland if you are not being clear and precise about what not just a group threat but the ecosystem in which they thrive.

to your second point right after the danish cartoon crisis, we were totally caught offguard. our country was caught off guard. the same thing could happen in copenhagen could affect kabul. in 2000 6, 2007, we were not where we needed to be. we were a little cocky about where we were with american muslims. without our narrative was different. we had an approach of, because we are so different, we never colonized come we have all these things going. we are more free to be muslim than anywhere else. we had some resilience. the effect of the matter is, in 2015, it has come home. it is here. the things that we see happening in europe are messed up testing -- manifesting in communities we

don't want to talk about. parents of kids looking at their muslim kids are asking themselves questions. how'd did i get here? how am i have to dealing with this crazy situation where i have a kid who now has an affinity to something so crazy that i would've never imagined. we need to calibrate that is happening on the ground and understand i'm not trying to build a fear mongering environment. i'm simply saying, there is so much data, so much about recruitment. it's time to be practical and clear and calm about how we talk about it and in that way you can build the kind of initiatives that are needed at the grassroots level to make sure our communities are not infected

>> is interesting -- >> we will go to audience questions. >> it interesting. i was raised by muslim parents. we were so grateful to be here you just dealt with it. it was inconceivable. you did not indulge in it. there was not the internet or twitter. fending of what was going on. you were lucky to be here. it is fascinating to hear how 2nd and 3rd generations think. i grew up with a different mentality. in terms of the question about the homeland, there is good news and bad news. relative to a european countries, the u.s. has relatively few fighters coming back. 150 from this country.

compared to 6000 from france. 1,000 from the uk. and i look at this from a military perspective, the expectation is we are the worlds military. >> it was the u.s. who was the u.s. who is supposed to be taking on a qad in yemen. and in the expectation is the us military has the response because we have the largest military. it is not necessarily because of foreign fighter comes back but a reaction to something that happens in europe where they have different problems than the us does. >> let's go to the audience.

right here in the front row. tell us who you are. >> hi. i am the executive director of the nonprofit that supports military and veteran families. we deal with a lot of the after effects of the decisions that are made in dc. two questions, do we actually have a strategy? what does winning look like? how do we articulate that to the american public? >> it's an excellent question. a great question. what when i was in the administration we did talk about this. we try and articulate the mechanisms for what that meant how you intervene, counter this ideology and how you deal with identity issues. that's a very difficult strategy to articulate. in terms of this administration

, the president's west point speech was the most recent articulation of the counterterrorism strategy at large. we're going to go after terrorists when they imminently threaten us. we're going to rely on key partners. from an ideological perspective we are going to rely on communities of interest like those assembled at this white house summit to actually help counter the ideology to do it the community and national level. that is the thumbnail sketch of the strategy. the question is how you actually implement that when the threat seems to be morphing quicker than our strategies are adapting.

and when you are putting artificial limitation to the types of resources and forms of american power that we are willing to invest, and that's why i said at the start one of the interesting things investing in this will we have to deal with this ideological problem. that really wasn't the attitude through most of the administration. there has been a lagging strategy and lagging resources as a result. here is the military strategy. we are not going to put forces on the ground. essentially we are the air force for the iraqi army and the rebels that have yet to emerge that we have trained in syria. the airpower is going to go after isis and limit there

-- their ability but they won't have that many tanks. it allows them to exploit populations and things like that. to build something new. and the iraqi army is going to come through. they we will be able to be the ground forces some point. to take advantage of the sort of containment. the problem is i'm not sure iraqis see themselves the same way. and how do you get the majority shia military to risk their life to take back the area of moses -- of mosul.

the military says they have identified 1200 that they will train. that is the military strategy. victory looks like there is a government that can sustain military gains. >> how long will it take to train these iraqi troops that are going to be the ground force? >> well, they say that they hope to have forces in place by summer. they are training forces that we will allegedly be a part of the campaign the starts in march and april. we are talking about weeks. >> is they're any indication that any other country will put

any kind of ground forces in? >> a lot of offers to hold our coats. >> i have never heard the egyptians or the qataris -- >> basically speaking to put together the kind of force you would need it will take some time. >> the conservative estimate is three to five years. you have the kurds. but they will not take mosul. and then you have turkey. but anyone -- but erdogan wants the u.s. to focus on a side -- focus on assad. >> mike morrell said the other

day that if it had not been for the airstrikes, that he believes that isis would have taken baghdad. >> it would have been a fight. it would have been an area that they fought for. isis is not good at wars where they actually have to fight. they didn't fight for mosul they were handed it. we have not seen ice's on a real force, that is why -- not seen isis take on a real force, that is why baghdad is interesting. >> let's go over here.

>> i am a reporter. it has been a really strange week in the realm of ideas. we had an article earlier in the atlantic asserting that the islamic state is very islamic and it's foolish to talk about these things without entering realistically and seriously in the realm of ideas. to what extent does the allergy -- does theology have consequences? what role does the united states playing talking about theology? how do we combat the seriously theologically driven threat? >> well, i want to say one thing to you. do we have a general in charge of ideas? do we have somebody who wakes up every day and looks of the

ideological war and says this is how we are going to play the battlefield? we don't. [inaudible conversations] >> so it is not just that piece. it is all of the other things that we are putting into the bucket of the soft power that that person doesn't actually control. and so the integration of both of those things, i mean, in my view is we think about all of these pieces, including the theological piece. part of our government is doing things in their own way and there is know one actually working it. i believe in our constitution and believe that there is a clear line between church and state. and i don't think anyone in the

united states government should be sitting around talking about what religion means. that is dangerous. and as somebody who was a special representative to muslim communities i never ever quoted the quran. being a taxpayer did not put me in charge of telling you what the quran means. so i have a very hard line on this. were not sitting hear pondering the meaning of these things. you know, one 5th of the planet is muslim, and they are diverse. all over the world cultures and heritages have impacted the way that they practice their faith . there is a lot of controversy about what is and is not islamic, whatever that might mean. i happen to be an american and i happen to be muslim, but i'm not qualified to sit here and tell you something that was written

. i don't feel comfortable doing that. muslim parents need to do everything that they can to stop there kids from being recruited based on a faulty premise. but it is not, in my view, the american government's responsibility to start saying who is a good a good and who is a bad muslim. the kind of approach that we are taking which is only talking about sunnis and shia, they're are a lot of minorities that are left behind. as far as i'm concerned it is not for me to say it was more or less. i will not say which is good or bad.

the minute we start talking about this walk down a dangerous path. >> over here. right here. >> back in the 60s we had a lot of young people getting radicalized to conduct violence. we had in in this country the fla, the red brigades, all these groups were being radicalized. people's nice middle-class children were robbing banks, killing people, taking hostages. how is this different? >> i think it's a great question. and a lot of the countermovement that we have talked about have tried to learn lessons from that time , from the anti- gang

initiative in certain communities in part because you have certain strains, the recruitment of radicalization that looks an awful lot like this. there are certain strands that are very similar. the main difference from my perspective -- it goes back to this question of theology. the difference between what you described in terms of the nationalist or other terrorist movements of the 60s, 70s, and even 80s or the cold war which is often looked to as a model for how we engage in ideological battles is very different from dealing with the transnational set of actors and networks that are trying to hijack religion and really are trying to use elements of the theology and

mythology around it to reshape identity and are trying to redefine and be vanguards for muslims around the world. this was in part of bin laden's doing, to create a muslim awakening that would imbue this ideology, this notion that the rest of the world of islam bears a religious obligation to fight, and the grievances are actually to be acted upon. the theological dimension in this transnational context, in the 21st century, that really is the difference between then and now. >> i would just say this, this and it will be our last comment. it is different because the stakes are so much higher in the weapons are so much to more dangerous.

is dangerous when you're fighting with machine guns but the fact is there are know -- are now nuclear weapons out they're. if one of these groups got one of those weapons there is know -- there is no question, i would think, in anyone's in anyone's -- in anyone's mind that they would use it. the stakes are higher today because of the danger that these weapons pose. that will have to be our last question. thank you so much for coming. [applause] >> on friday, the washington institute for near east policy

host discussion on the increased number of foreign fighters joining isis. speakers include the former commander who oversaw detainee operations in iraq. if there's a new eastern time on c-span2 -- it starts at 12:00 eastern time on c-span2. coming up next, the techcrunch disrupt conference featuring braintree ceo bill ready and walter isaacson. and whether the u.s. should arm ukraine in the conflict with russia. later, chris christie speaking at the reagan dinner in new hampshire. on friday, president obama addresses the winter meeting of the democratic national committee. the three-day conference focuses on the party's strategy following losses in last year's midterm elections.

>> the political landscape has changed with the 114th congress. there are new republicans in the house and senate, and there are also 100 and eight women -- 108 women in congress. keep track of the women in congress using congressional chronicle on c-span.org. the page has useful information including voting results and's -- and statistics. >> next, braintree ceo bill ready talking about paypal's acquisition of his company. we will also hear from walter isaacson on his latest book,

"the innovators." this event was part of last fall's techcrunch disrupt conference in san francisco. >> number one fan down there. very excited. i hope you guys all had a great break. they say that the best things in life are free, but we all know the most important thing in life is money. this guy knows quite a bit. please welcome to the stage, bill ready. >> i was checking our old techcrunch post and it looks

like it has been about a year since paypal said it will acquire braintree. one year on, how's it going? >> it is going really well. a big part of it coming together was we had built a bunch of things that were around mobile payments. one premise for us is even though we were doing 14 billion plus in volume, we could get to a much larger audience and built on it that -- products that we had a harder time building on our own. it was really exciting then, and a year later, we launched a lot of other things. >> this is your fourth company. how is that different at this point in your career versus the

earlier ones? >> one of the things interesting about this, having done it a few times, you spent a lot of times deciding where we want to go. we spent a lot of time talking about, how do we connect several years of payments? do we have an idea on what mobile buying would look like? speaking of making mobile payments easier, there is something you have wanted to announce today, right? >> the one touch buying experience that we started with, and then put in data with paypal two weeks ago, will now be generally available. it will be the first in the industry to allow a one touch mobile buying experience.

first in industry to do that across platforms. that is a big part of when i came to braintree early on -- a big part of how i felt it will play out. now we can put that in the hands of millions of paypal users. this is huge. it has the opportunity to really change the way people interact with mobile devices for commerce. >> when we were talking a year ago, you get into the apps and you click on it and pay and you don't have to think about reentering your credit card. what does the experience look like? >> we started doing this creating a co-op across different apps. now that we have access to that paypal users, we have made it so it is even cleaner, where there is a fast switch that lets you pay in a single touch.

>> can we roll the video? [video clip] >> it's one of those things where you look at it and it looks really slick and simple. and you say, why hasn't it always been that way? it is really difficult. >> it will work for all paypal users, correct? >> yes, anyone with a paypal

mobile app will have access to this. very exciting news. a couple of years from now, this is the default way you can buy on a mobile device. >> the other thing you want to announce as you are now allowing merchants to accept bitcoin. >> one of the things we have always done is given easy access to sophisticated payments. that started with one touch payments, and one of the interesting things happening is bitcoin. as someone who has worked with the ecosystem directly, i think bitcoin as a protocol has that potential to address a lot of that.

we are announcing paypal's first foray into bitcoin. within the next couple of months we will allow our users to accept bitcoin the our partnership. it will be a slick experience on the consumer side. the coin wallet will be easily presented for consumers to pay with a highly adaptive mobile optimized experience. >> when did your first interest in bitcoin start? >> i have had it for a long time. in the early days of bitcoin, i was paying close attention. around 2009 i was really following it. it was a question of, when what is the right time. there were issues of regulatory compliance, and consumer experience.

a lot of those things needed to be solved. it seems like we are at the right moment where we can do this in a high-quality way. but we are still in the early days where there is a lot of growth to happen. >> what made it the right time now? >> i think it is sort of the right confluence of several factors. you have reputable providers providing high-quality consumer experiences, and also demand from merchants that are also interested in looking at the legacy payment. all of those things come together. we are at the right time to really start to step further into this and see how we can help propel it forward.

>> is this just braintree accepting bitcoin or is it paypal? >> this is paypal's first foray into bitcoin. it is not just braintree, we are looking at this, and ebay also said he is interested in bitcoin. paypal is our first move to really embrace bitcoin via braintree. >> does this mean some of your bigger partners are going to start accepting transactions in bitcoin, like airbnb? >> we don't have any specific merchants now, but we will announce them over the next couple of months. we do expect a lot of heavy interest. we are hearing already that they had interest. both the one touch mobile payments that we announced as

well as bitcoin is going to be high interest to a lot of merchants. >> great. thank you so much. >> thank you. [applause] >> how many of you have gadgets? how many people have one with them right now? do you guys hear me? i know you can. chances are, this guy was involved with the creation of that gadget. he is hugely important to the ecosystem of hardware. so please welcome liam casey. [applause] >> no one can hear anything. there we go. how many of you know this is? nobody? how many of you own electronic

products? this guy probably handled most of them. he personally ships a lot of stuff. i was told that you would wear your traditional irish dress. i feel very out of sorts. that said, you are the guy who does amazing stuff in hardware. and james fallows, in 2007, he went over to china and did a fascinating article about what china makes and the world takes.you are mr. china. tell these folks a little bit about this. >> we are a supply chain management company. we take ideas. some has the idea for a product. we take it from the concept to the consumer.