coordination. conduct does not know jurisdictional bounds. at the department of justice our goal is to ensure that coordination is as efficient as possible on something that cuts across so many different statutes and expertise. our counterterrorism section within our division maintains contact with the u.s. attorney's offices across the country for the purpose of terrorism matters and to maintain an expertise on statute used in prosecutions. the national security division along with the fbi in a representative from the u.s. attorneys community, we cochair the domestic terrorism executive committee. this was a committee that was originally formed by attorney general janet reno in response to the oklahoma city bombings with the goal of ensuring that

there was a forum to talk about the different ways these domestic terrorism events and actors cut across statutes and expertise of the department. it was actually scheduled to meet on september 11, 2001. we reestablished it and started the dtec up again last june. a civil rights division along with many others across the federal law enforcement spectrum who work on domestic terrorism matters. as it originally did, it serves as a forum to share information about the trends we see across the leadership level and within the federal law-enforcement community and to ensure national level coordination. this is a threat that requires

as much as any other. not just a federal response to working closely with police officers, local community officials, and members of the community. in order to ensure that we gain the benefits of information and input coming in from all of those different eyes on the ground and in recognition of the growing number of domestic terrorism matters across the country and across all of the united states, we have created a new position to assist in our important work in combating domestic terrorism. just this week, i appointed a new council to serve as our main point of contact for u.s. attorneys working on domestic terrorism matters. the new domestic terrorism council will not only ensure that cases are properly

coordinated but will play a key role in our headquarters' efforts to identify trends, shape national strategy and analyze legal gaps or enhancements required to ensure we can come at these threats. the new council will play an important role in in providing members with overviews of cases and trends from around the country. working together, our objective is to disrupt and prevent terrorist attacks. a successful result is not in prosecution although they are sometimes necessary. it is that we see the attack prevented, the injury that never occurs. we need to use all the investigative tools at our disposal and we need to do so aware that perhaps more so than any other area in which we operate, we need to be mindful of civil liberties and fundamental values. we do not investigate people for exercising their first amendment

rights. we are obligated to investigate extremist groups and individuals when we have reason to believe that they are involved in the commission of a federal crime including crimes of violence. we need to utilize techniques including undercover operation, the use of confidential informants and other statutory authorities to stay ahead of the threat. undertaken with oversight and appropriate respect for civil rights and liberties, these tools can and have been highly effective. we have used them with success for many years and they have become globally recognized as people moved to confront the international terrorist threat. they have been recognized as invaluable in the fight against terrorism and organized crime. you need to make sure that someone who is talking the talk is willing to take that step to walk the walk.

an undercover operation, you see whether this is someone who is willing to follow through and kill or maim others. we can only track threats we can see. with the explosive use of social media and encrypted communications, we run the risk that we will see less as the bad guys are seeing more. social media in this space can create a radicalization echo chamber. each of their own calls for checking this propaganda or violence echo and support the others. i know that is a phenomenon southern poverty center has analyzed. as service providers who provide a service that does so much good and has so many legitimate is this an entertainment purposes

and is the way most of our children are communicating and playing day-to-day, as it provides those good things they need to take responsibility for how services can be abused. responsible providers need to understand what the threats are and work within their own terms to take action to prevent groups from exploiting a service that is not meant for them to induce recruits to commit terrorist attacks. when we become aware of extremist criminal activity, investigation and prosecution is while the most powerful tools in our toolbox. in the wake of the oklahoma city bombing, congress passed the so-called antiterrorism and effective death penalty act in 1996. part of that legislation are critical to our fight against terrorism. on the domestic front, this is some confusion. the codebook defines domestic terrorism as illegal activities that are dangerous to human life

and take place primarily here in the united states and appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of government by intimidation or affect the conduct of a government. what causes some of the confusion is that is not a particular offense that we can charge as domestic terrorism. instead, the use of that definition can be used to use certain tools and for things like sentencing enhancements. when we are confronting the offense itself, we have the whole criminal code at our disposal. over the years we have charged violent extremists with a variety of crimes ranging from explosive offenses to arson threats or fraud. we will continue to increase our

focus using the full range of authorities to protect the public against these threats. that act provided for certain enhancements for certain terrorism related enhancements. a federal offense prohibited the possession of stolen explosives. that continues to be a significant tool in keeping dangerous explosives out of the hands of those who would use them for violent ends. through the leadership of senator dianne feinstein, congress passed the statute that criminalized the distributing a bomb making information in support of a federal crime of violence. this statute allows us to prosecute those who engage in terrorist acts themselves but also those who share deadly skills with others so they can engage in such attacks. in 2005, one individual, a one-time member of the ku klux klan, pleaded guilty to six it offenses for constructing seven pipe bombs and instructing a

confidential informant on how to use the bombs to cause the most destruction. sure it's believed the bombs would be used to attack mexican and haitian immigrants in florida and he was ultimately sentenced to prison. although law enforcement is a powerful tool, it's not the only tool. we must as a community work to reach individuals early on that path toward radicalization. the ideal solution is one that never reaches my shop for a law enforcement response. programs like gw will be particularly important on this front, to counter violent extremism. we must begin by doing more to empower those that have the best place to affect change. to that end, the attorney general, when she was attending the united nations general assembly events, hosted her own first-ever network of city leaders around the world

involved in building community resilience. the network was created in recognition of the role of local communities in battling extremism and the need for more than a top-down approach. an approach that builds up from the communities instead. it takes a page from our integrated strategy and combating other types of violent extremism. we are most successful when we partner with and are out in the local communities working together to uphold the law. community members are often best positioned to relate to individuals were begun on a path of violent extremism because they see things we do not see in law-enforcement. in the united states according to one study, 80% of the international terrorism inspired cases inside the united states, there was a connection -- a third-party bystander who was in a position to see the radicalization taking place but in over half those cases that

person who saw it taking place did nothing to intervene. if we could increase the number of those witnesses who take action to help us stop that path radicalization a good reduce the number of lives lost. there are similar evidence in other studies, cases of violent extremism. not only have a best edition to be influential in stopping people along this path, they may be the first is the potential signs of radicalization. to work with youth programs and take other efforts. these outreach programs should lead to better trust and cooperation on anything ranging from civil rights to violence.

we are exploring options to intervene with would be violent extremism before violence occurs and to think about trying to encourage those in the nonprofit community to develop best practices on offramps for those would be radicalized toward violence. this program will require continued community engagement and discussion. as we are learning in the international terrorism context, it requires countering the message of hate online. figuring out where the people are. that means where they are not just in physical space but where they are in cyberspace so we know were to reach them and figuring out what messages are most effective to keep them from following the spew of lies and bigotry that encourages people toward violence.

often in that effort, some of the most valuable people can be former extremists who can explain why they went down that path in the first instance and why they realized it was the wrong path to take. they are often the most credible voices when it comes to being a positive voice back to those who are otherwise inclined to go down this path. southern poverty law center has a history of tracking hate in their efforts will continue to be critical. social media itself can be an avenue for those who want to counter bad guys. it could be a good place to get those stories out for those who have overcome difficult

circumstances and avoided hate filled alienation. to conclude, we honor in all of our work and strive to those affected by acts of terrorism. those who were killed and injured as well as those who survived and have proven resilient. the first responders and families touched by those acts. we welcome opportunities like this to discuss our work, share ideas and learn new ways of countering this type of violent extremism. we know the seriousness of the challenge we face and the stakes could not be higher. we know that we have to come up with new and innovative ways to prevent these attacks from taking place while doing so in a way that's consistent with fundamental values, civil rights, and civil liberties.

we are grateful to have this forum. we are grateful for gw's new project on extremism as it looks to develop data that can guide us in ways to confront this threat. i look forward to your questions and discussion. [applause] dr. vidino: thank you very much. a comprehensive overview of forms of extremism. interesting to see the similarities, differences and the approach the department is taking. you provide a 360 degree overview of the hard and soft parts of both the threats and response that comes with it. very grateful that you decided to use this menu to make an important announcement. you discussed some of the issues that are controversial. some of the issues to counter extremism in general ranging from tactics used. to have some interesting questions, i give the floor to heidi.

dr. beirich: i want to thank you for what was a comprehensive speech and interesting for me. thank you to gw for putting this on. what struck me is that your description of domestic terrorist threats from the area we study, sovereign citizens, antigovernment folks, pretty much the way i would see it as well. we at the southern poverty law center for a while now have felt like the federal government was not responding to the fact that domestic terrorism was an increasing problem, especially lone actor terrorism. i don't think that could be set today at all. the revitalization of the committee started by holder last

june, that having met several times, the new post you announced today is important. i think in general, the department of justice has been shifting resources and research into studying domestic terrorism as well as international terrorism and nothing i say here should be taken to imply that islamic expired extremism is not important. i was glad to hear all of that. as the southern poverty law center looks at terrorism, one of the biggest issues that we see is basically we are seeing lone actor attacks take place about every 34 days in the united states. that includes our number for that since 2009 includes some extremist islamic attacks as well. the bulk of them have been white supremacists or antigovernment extremists.

what we are seeing is a collapse in organized hate groups. the number of hate groups is than falling rapidly. people who are inspired by these ideas don't feel like they should be card-carrying members of these groups. it brings with it leadership battles. all kinds of trouble for these activists. what we are seeing is people picking up guns and doing violence against groups they are threatened by. a second part of this is they seem to be being radicalized almost entirely online. dylan roof was one of the best examples of this. he said in his manifesto, my entire world changed the day i came upon that hate site for the council of concerned citizens. a website that makes the presentation that there's out-of-control black on white

crime throughout the country. he apparently went down the road of becoming extremely radicalized and eventually murdering people in charleston. i thought i would ask more about this radicalization online. what kinds of challenges doesn't pose in terms of civil liberties? in a way that is different from the 1980's or mcveigh and a small cell. mr. carlin: it is a troubling trend. we see it in particular -- i will start on the international arena. what we see now is the islamic state in the levant decided to use social media to him barred thousands of messages a day through widespread propaganda. the number of people who bite on

that is small proportionally but it does not take a large number two cause great acts of harm. this is a tactic they are using throughout the world. it is hitting a smaller percentage inside the united states. the result is clear in the types of cases we see. that's why we believe it is so geographically dispersed because it is not coming usually from the local community. that's why you see it in 25 different u.s. attorneys offices. we are also seeing a troubling statistic in that it also affects the youth of the people getting drawn into this type of act. whereas with core al qaeda it might be aimed older demographic. here we are seeing in over 50%

of cases we have brought, the defendants are 25 or younger. a third of them are 25 or younger. the criminal justice system is not a great tool for dealing with juveniles. we prefer not to bring federal juvenile cases. we need a way when it comes to those who are getting radicalized online, what happens is they get the broad message and then we are seeing designated terrorists overseas having direct conversations with people and it could be in the bedroom of your house and the parents are not used to -- they know who their kids friends are in the school or the real world but they don't know who they are hanging out with online. they end up actually talking to a terrorist overseas or starts walking them down the path of

radicalization and that conversation sometimes is taking place on a commercially provided encrypted service. even if we are able to obtain the predicate to get a court order, when you go to serve it you cannot see the content of the conversation. that is a challenge for the law enforcement and intelligence community. in part, relying on research like yours as you look at it. we are definitely seeing an echo chamber where there are these places where people share violent thoughts and extremist ideologies online. we are also starting to see that type of connectivity or conversation take place when it comes to those who are motivated by the sovereign citizen ideology or white extremism. i think it is one where those who provide the communities where these conversations take place and know the services best and how to reach individuals need to and have begun to put resources into thinking, how can we prevent people from taking advantage of the services we provide to do what we don't want them to do which is try to get

children to commit acts of terrorism. they are going to need to be part of the solution because it is not taking place -- it is not one we can do on the street or in schools. we have to talk to those providing online forums. dr. beirich: which makes me think about another thing. twitter, the social media capability of isil is similar to white supremacy in the united states. using the same tools for recruitment pushing whatever version of nasty propaganda might be. essentially functioning in the same way. there is overlap between al qaeda cost magazine being attractive to white supremacists.

bomb making techniques and so on. what is there to do to counter this? there are individuals and institutions, especially when it comes to islamic extremism, that are trying to counter twitter postings were recruitment is happening. i wonder if you think there is any analogy to the united states situation. we have the first amendment, certain protections that should exist. it doesn't make it more complicated for you all? mr. carlin: i will talk more broadly. the structure that takes place or the statute we use for international terrorism is often the material support to terrorism statute. that is a statute that is predicated on a formal designation process of a group as an international terror cell. once it is designated, support

to that group, be it financial come in the form of your own person, providing other types of material or weapons to that group. that statute is not one that we have for domestic terrorism groups and i think it reflects our values. to do that for a group here would mean based on who the group is and what they are doing that the entire group is designated as the terrorist group. it exist in international terrorism arena the same way we have different tools available when it is a foreign nationstate behind an attack or conduct. that is one change. another change is the foreign intelligence surveillance act. that relies on a tie to a foreign power. both statutory and constitutional reasons why you would not have the same tools

available if it's a domestic actor. that allows us to get certain court processes to obtain court orders that would otherwise not be available. law-enforcement, federal and local, working together. also local community groups here. if you plan on countering the message without talking about any particular company, i would hope it is one where it might be easier for us because it is coming so much out of our own culture to find credible voices here who can reach these groups and talk about how they had once gone down that path and now are opposing it. it's an area where we found what's most important is that it does not come from the federal government. as a prosecutor of these cases,

i'm not going to be the best voice to reach those whom it be going down the path so it will be working with nonprofits or independent groups who on their own can figure out who those voices are. using our power of persuasion with those in the private sector who might provide avenues for getting those voices out consistent with their own terms of service. then you don't have any first amendment issue. it's a private driven community-based response. i think our role in government in part is to make sure we're doing what we're doing here and talking to people about what the threat is that we are seeing. hopefully used as discussions to call people to action. dr. beirich: one of the things the southern poverty law center is concerned about is demographic change in the united states when it comes to extremist groups we track. the country is going to become

more multicultural, more ethnically diverse. we know the white population will fall below 50% in the 2040's according to the census. certainly with us for a while because it is part of american history, these wets a premise that he is which we have now spent several decades rejecting and changing. the civil rights movement being key to that. i would if there is talk of the department about the challenge going forward. mr. carlin: i think we are definitely concerned about the challenge going forward. that's partly why the international terrorism threat right now rightly picks up a great deal of attention.

it is an issue of and, not or. we need to make sure we have the mechanisms in place so that we may continue to remain just as focused on the domestic terrorism threat while addressing the international terrorism threat. that is one reason taking a look at our structure, a single person who will focus on nothing but the domestic terrorism issue to serve as a coordinator across different departments in agencies. depending on the group, it might manifest itself in white-collar type crime. it might be violent extremism or those who need expertise on prosecuting the use of explosives.

it might be a hate crime, it might be motivated by environmental extremism, whereby individuals there commit violent the, and then it is in environmental division, so it is important for us structurally to come up with things like the domestic terrorism executive council to make sure we are looking across that spectrum of threat appropriately for when you hit that juncture, where the idea crosses over. >> thank you. >> i have a question about your conversation. certain cases, for first amendment issues, and particularly when it comes to young people, juveniles, the challenge they face.

there have been discussions, and some of them to create programs, the way we have seen some developing atries, strategy going forward. i was wondering if you can talk about in some cases the prosecution, what are the legal and even political challenges are. mr. carlin: im not in a word, but it would be reaching individuals before they come on the radar, and so that is early stage, when someone first gets , and at that

point, having someone in the , and ity talk to them is one that should be easy for us, in a way, because we are up against. evil, so the individuals, if what, fory knew about instance, the islamic state and the levant is doing in syria before they have gone down the pass, we would never go down that path. it is similar with some of these individuals in the united states , if they originally fully someone they trusted in the community, they would never go down that path. this is the type of work to take place with the support of the community, and the pilot programs are designed in part to

spur that type of activity and, again, to -- let me give you an example, a simple example. when it comes to domestic violence sexual offense cases come you cannot look at the sexual predators anymore without educating people about the threats that our kids face, and it isnew, and similarly, taking place online, so we need to educate about what we are seeing, it when it comes to do the same thing with respect threats. once you hit the criminal justice system, i think it is much harder. now, there are going to be what, in no matter most cases, where someone is convicted and has served their sentence. there are going to be released to the community, and when it offenders,ngs or there is the track record of working with these individuals reoffend.

we do not have the same resources in place, routes in the community that have in the community, so i look forward to groups like yours, coming up with that kind of solution in the future, so if someone gets out, and we are looking for a program, this program exists, and there is research done as to whether or not they are effective or not. vidino: thank you very much. we will take some questions from the public. if you could identify yourself first, please. yes. turn it on. >> i think i can speak -- first of all, i want to thank all three of you for the handling of

this very difficult topic. the organizations you represent. thank you. but as much as i think this has been treated comprehensively, i see one glaring gap. intelligence author, i often see this in the military round, as well. diplomacy. we just came back from turkey, and they have the same threats. have the problems in taiwan, japan, south korea.

is i do notggesting know how anybody can go about mater, to try to like-minded groups across the globe who are dealing with these same issues to look at what types of solutions that are coming up with and the problems they face versus problems we do so you do not waste time on those, but also just generally, efforts, theing greatest minds in the globe, not just the u.s.. mr. vidino: thank you. >> my name is ron taylor. green one. hit the

>> my name is ron. thank you all for the great questions and just putting this discussion on. i will of with the commentary of anyway, i'm but trying to think of what could complement the program and programs in the additions that described, and there are a couple of things, and there is a questionnaire. certainly, one is we always went person toat extreme discover that rising threat as soon as we can, and that is the goal of a certain type of activity. and as you say, we want to avoid labeling groups and things like that. to find the people who do the bad things and stop them before they do it. securityofessional

profession, and in the personal safety profession, there has been a lot of work recently on dealing with internal -- insider and infrastructures could include, you know, school systems, education systems. there is, as you know, we all --w there is a rising violent actions in the school systems pre-and we have seen it in oregon, connecticut, colorado would there be utility with the approach is that the fbi and we all have with trying to treat, you know, trying to detect and discover these rising threats from the perspective of looking at insider threat approaches? as you might address infrastructures. question, butf a there is a lot of work behind

it, so i would just leave it there. mr. vidino: let's take one more. you. >> hi, i am with the american bar association standing of law and security, and in social media, starting to put resources towards the venting their networks from being abused, and a specific question, if there are currently, or if there are plans in the future for a public-private partnership with the social media networks, either information sharing or addressing the mutual interests? mr. carlin: i will meld all three questions. dealing with the terrorism witht, lessons learned violent extremism.

that is a very important effort, with the president and other , and for therity first time you had a unanimous security council with a resolution requiring countries around the world to have statutes on their books that have actionthem to to prevent individuals from joining foreign terrorist groups , and we also met there, and secretary kerry was chairing it with a group called the global countering terrorist force, and a group of countries designed specifically to share best practices on these terrorism having an undercover operation which is consistent with the liberties and civil rights, how to use classified

information with a legal , also with the rights of the accused, and we talked about best practices and violent i think that has been incredibly valuable, and for those of you doing research in this area, a memorandum. the social media question, but also the threat posed by spies, espionage, and there is a great effort in retooling to confront the national security cyber threats that we are facing, and in conjunction with this divisioned and are breaking down a wall with law enforcement and intelligence.

when it comes to insider-type threats, we also in this area need to get better at sharing across the federal-private line. you cannot have cyber protection without talking. isot of the infrastructure in private, and similarly, the espionage threat, we started and announced focusing full-time on domestic terrorism and using a biometric hand reader to get into the office. there are devices in the wall to prevent eavesdropping, and we would not normally have conversations like this in a public forum or a meeting of the public sector, and realize given the way the threat has changed that that has to be a part of

the job of not just the person in my role but built into our division and pushed out to all of the u.s. attorneys across the country, has dated a they are the ones interacting with the they needols, and so to be out sharing threat information in a way that was not traditionally part of the job. so we started this new outreach involve and it does making sure they are aware of what we are seeing in terms of the threat and working through how we can confront it. vidino: next. >> in the wake of the most recent shooting in oregon, we asked to compare the number of

deaths from gun violence to terrorism, which, of course, greatly outnumbers those, and the implicit message seem to be that there isn't over emphasis on terrorism, that you can have one problem that is bigger, which does not mean that the second problem that is smaller is not a problem by any means, and it shows that certainly domestic terrorism is an issue, but i just wonder if, because that point is one i have heard with the intel, and they talk .bout the over estimate they will often say the threat from russia or china or cyber is great. i just wonder from your perspective, do you think -- in resources, in messaging, perhaps even in the way we cover it in the news that we exaggerate the threat, to some degree, which is

not to say it is not a threat, but to exaggerate? and did you bristle of love it when you said that? and i think you know where i am going with this. in our coverage, that we get this balance right. law enforcement perspective, a national security perspective? carlin: the president i know , a privilege to work for, is very much focused on preventing terrorist attacks in the united states and against our citizens so, he remains dedicated and expects us, as, again, the president did before him -- we focus on this threat and to use all resources provided to us to make sure that

there are not citizens killed here with those filled with hate, so when it comes to preventing that threat, i think one reason why we have seen and the numbers killed by these actors to stay low, because of a dedicated efforts of individuals, not just at the department of justice or at the fbi but across the intelligence of ourty and the members military overseas and our diplomats. using the rules, the treasury sanction war diplomats or military tools, dashboard andomats or military tools, we need to remain dedicated, because they still want to do those attacks, and if we were not out there deterring, i think they would be investing in it.

issue, domestic terrorism. there are those who have lost loved ones or who are dealing with rehabilitation from a terrible injury. what the motive was, and maybe i say that too broadly, but they keep asking me to do is prevent other families from having to go through those ircumstances again, and so always worry when it comes to terrorism. and the 9/11 commission put out a report that talked about the responsibility of officials to talk about the threat candidly

before the attacks occur, and i always worry because the goal is to inspire terror, affect the and to do aernment, job, do it right, and nobody would be talking about it, and that is winning against terrorism, and you have to balance that against -- part of what we are doing is educating people, for instance. if it is a threat occurring on social media, getting a message out there that people need to be aware of what their children are doing on social media. we work to get it right, and we do not always do, and i worry in such athat this is thathat it induces fear the terrorists are attempting to accomplish, and i think we have to be careful about the way we talk about it. >> i agree.

>> from the university of ottawa . thank you for putting this together. you talk about timidity engagement, and they wonder if that, and whatn in your experience have you found in terms of engaging the example, where we already talk about the dangers ,f drugs and sexual predators who teach our young people. would it be -- to what extent would it be effective with extremism and developing anti-extremism ethics in the life of a young individual?

heidi: are there schools that reach out to superintendents and the value ofout richness and diversity, and perhaps it can be done in conjunction with the u.n. program. thank you. david: yes. david baylor. last maynt to say that at a management conference, i asked the director of intelligence and interior what they are doing to look at the growing threat of white supremacists and antigovernment and noticed that the -- based oned information from the fbi that

splc numbers were not reliable and that actually the numbers were used to market and raise contributions to the group, and i asked him, is that your opinion or fact, and he said, "that is my judgment." can you address the value of splc's work in helping you deal terrorism and extremism, and number two, can them involved again? because they talk about earth first. they really do not talk about domestic terrorism, antigovernment work, and that threatens the u.s. >> hi, jim long. we are heading into a

presidential election. we are seeing increased threats in terms oft suspicious activity, and what are you doing, in particular, that is special and different tom other efforts in terms counter that if there are more threats? mr. carlin: to address the full range of questions. election, ip to the know that the fbi, department of homeland security, and other groups will look carefully to track where there are threats linked to the election, as they have leading up to prior there are and if specific threats, we will work

to get that information to address those affected by the threats but also a broader warning to the general local law enforcement community. we are already trying to gear up in that regard. with the questions of the role of thehe schools, i think it is a andable area to look at, those of you that stay after, there are some other folks from the department of justice who are not part of the countering violent extremism, but it is --eady i know the case having addressed a conference of local mayors and also u.s. attorneys -- that they are starting to work together with how we can get this message into the school system as they have and in terms of

the department of interior, they are a member. council,tic terrorism definitely at the meetings, and they need to be because of the threats, as you actually -- accurately point out. and in terms of groups, i will , but i will say based on our briefings, as i wed in our opening remarks, think this threat demands to be addressed in creative ways and having groups that dedicate themselves to examining what the threat is and reporting at it, it often puts them at personal risk, because these are groups that will identify individuals and threaten them with violence

or otherwise file these so atous legal motions, the poverty law center and other groups in the space, i look forward to gw entering this space as well and doing in." research, because as jim was saying from cnn, there is a lot of research in terrorism, and it helps much when trying to confront that, to confront that threat, but there is not as much with the citizen groups , and it would be equally helpful in confronting the threat. >> we have an upcoming report on isis in america, and we actually looked at all of the cases, and andook at the social media,

i think we have five minutes left. >> with the associated press. some of the historical cases have historically fallen into the civil rights division, the fbi, with the charleston shooting, and the shooting outside the jcc. would they take more of an equity or state where cases have historically been civil rights matters or a hate crime? >> i think we effectively work them through now, but this will the martinmple of luther king jr. attempt bombing of that parade, and it is a case where he looked across and

investigated -- we often do not know what the motive is. there are a lot of theories out be a groupthat might motivated, or a white extremist group, so you were together, given your different expertise and the different things you can authorize to make sure you are leaving no investigative stone unturned, and then you can look and see given the conduct and the evidence that we have developed, which legal pool is best used to hold this person to account question mark for example, in the mlk bombing, there were charges brought related to a hate crime, related to the explosive device, and there was also domestic

terrorism related sentencing, so it is what is not important. from my perspective, to make sure we are able to utilize the expertise, the tools across the department, and that is where i hope that we are continuing our focus but having someone looking at that, what are we seeing on the trends? do we need new legislation? do we need new policy question sometimes, that is very important. >> the gentleman in the back, yes. >> from cnn. efforts, as with isil and other terror groups? >> one question i had was about

lone actor terrorism, specifically. this goes from bombers to gun ask what i'm going to can be done specifically to reduce that? mr. carlin: i will start with that one. that is a hard question. it bears a little bit on the where therelier, are some of these events, and publicly charged, but unfortunately, it means that some get out into the community. i think it is a good area of research as to why most people when you learn about these events, their reaction is that it is horrifying, and you could not possibly imagine why someone would do it

.learly there is an audience we need to find the avenues that would keep those individuals from violent acts. you do see you bleed over in unusual ways. when case in new york, individuals were motivated by islamic extremist groups. as they did their internet research on tactics, they looked up the bombing methods of used in the oklahoma city bombing. you did see this overlap. oneencryption, this is where it is important to have a discussion. what we seeing now -- if you think about it through thousands of years of military history, the ability to communicate instantaneously for command and control purposes, along