israeli and civilian military control. so basically we only have control of 18% of our land. most of the escalation is jerusalem,n occupied under total israeli control, and the fact that the settlers have been carrying out attacks against palestinians, the most worst, the israelis have not even captured one single perpetrator. the chief of staff of israel declared that they know who the culprits were, but they don't want to arrest or interfere with the investigation. them, onlyy caught

15% of them will be brought to justice and will be persecuted, so basically you have settler gangs who are attacking palestinians, and only the first week of this month such attacks took place against the palestinian population or civilians in the west bank. according this year, a source, settler attacks against the palestinians. so what do you expect the palestinians to do? their human rights have been denied, and occupation the longest in recent history, a purging the 50 year mark in two years. a government not committed to peace, does not have the agenda for peace, or as being as they took over in 2009, increase ,ettlement activities by 20%

and all what we are seeing on the ground is a consolidation of the occupation, more settlements , and then they expect us to honor the agreements, why they themselves are not abiding by the agreements that we signed. this current prime minister of israel himself signed the side them in 1998 and subsequent agreements and until today he did not even implement the agreements that his signature is on. so they expect the palestinians to continue to give and give, while what we are getting in return from the israelis, more settlements, more occupation, more restrictions, more closures , and then on top of that, they ,lay the religious issue pushing the two peoples to

religious war instead of confining it to a political war. now, our leadership said clearly , the president said clearly at the u.n., and repeated that yesterday, the palestinians, we did not say we are abandoning all slow, but this is the new york times, washington poised -- post, whatever headlines they like, it does not change the fact. we have said the israelis are not abiding, and we would not abide by our part. we were supposed to do certain things in order for israel to reciprocate and reduce its grip on the palestinian people and the palestinian land. what they have done is the opposite so far. as a leadership, we cannot continue to give and receive nothing in return. does not, if israel

honor is part of the agreement, we will not honor our part of the agreement. it is as simple as that, a simple equation, fair in any bilateral agreement. if your partner sign an agreement and one partner does not commit to that agreement, why do you expect the other party, the weaker party, the palestinians, to commit and to honor their part of the agreement. ? as for any prospects of political movement, unfortunately i am not very optimistic. i don't think that anything will happen from now until the next election. we hear the statements from officials here that they are committed, they want to do something, we believe them. we believe secretary kerry when he says that. we believe that he is sincere and genuine, but you need to take a different approach. you cannot continue for this

explosion, the next explosion, and the try to contain it, and then business as usual. we cannot go back to the failed process or format that we had for 20 years that did not bring to palestinians any closer statehood and independence. there has to be a different approach. the bilateral approach sponsored by the united states has failed. it is not a secret that it has failed. so to continue insist on a bilateral approach where israel and the palestinians, israel with all its military might, all its political clout here in this country thanks to the congress, versush all its support the weaker party like the palestinians and say why don't you negotiate and we were just observe, it is not going to work. there has to be a different approach.

there has to be a more international, more bilateral approach, in which the united states will be an important party, but not the only party that will oversee and help us reach an agreement. ,here has to be an agreement not an agreement, but a commitment by both sides. accept the past agreements, implement obligations, and adhere to the terms of reference of this whole political process that was agreed many times before from the resolutions, roadmap, to all other pertinent agreements that we signed between the plo and israel. unless we, with a different way,ach, i don't see any because this is really government believes that the status quo can continue forever. they believe that they will

continue to build settlements, continued to pressure the palestinians, and expect the palestinians to hug them and say thank you for continuing the occupation. this is something that will not happen, will not continue, and what is happening in jerusalem should be a wake-up call for the israelis. part of jerusalem in 1968, the eternal united capital of israel, and yet they roadblocks and arab neighborhoods, preventing people from moving from one area to another, and they are imposing closures on these neighborhoods, and we saw the palestinians sending a message to the israelis in jerusalem and elsewhere that they are fed up with this occupation. it is time that this occupation is in the, and the united states and the international community must assume a moral

responsibility of putting an end to this brutal military occupation, allowing the palestinians to exercise the right to self determination and establish their own independent palestinian state. we are still for a two-state solution. that, many don't believe maybe some in this room, but this is the only ideal way out of this country, a palestinian state and the state of israel and unfortunate, israel today with its policies is pushing everybody towards the one-state solution. and what we are seeing today in the west bank and in jerusalem is a byproduct of these israeli efforts to kill once and for all the two-state solution. i hope that we can still find partners in israel. we continue to extend our hand for peace, unalterable piece,

but not a piece that will allow israel to control us for another 50 years or 100 years. we are genuine in our intentions to in this conflict, but it takes two to tango, and if the israelis want to do it on their own, then they should be ready that wehe consequences are are unfortunately seeing right now. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, ambassador. now we will hear from jim, maybe you can give us some color on domestic politics? >> thank you. cover the wanted to terrain, if you don't mind. you asked in the beginning by talking about the role that palestine plays in the broader

arab region. what i would like to do is lay out what i think are some constants that cannot be ignored , then define the political terrain in which this issue finds itself. first in the broader arab world, there is no doubt that the olivia,f syria, yemen, taken- libya, iraq have headlines everywhere. in all the polling we do palestine remains a consensual concern of arabs everywhere -- a central concern of arabs everywhere. it is fascinating to me the degree of intensity that exist across lines, morocco, iraq, even in the depths of despair in iraq, it still remains a central concern.

so that i have come to see it as almost an existential the finding issue in the arab world. palestine is, and people sometimes don't understand that when you say that, but palestine is for arabs what the holocaust was for american juice. a horrible thing that happened to people just like me far away, but it reminded me of my vulnerability. it reminded me of my sense of loss. it reminded me of a since of the trail of the west. it reminds me of the denial of rights. all of the things that define in many ways the character and personality of people in air countries across the region are somehow captured in this palestinian narrative. it is real, and it grabs hold. second is how does it play out here in america?

decades andthe decades of one side defining the argued thatlways you have two sides in a football game and one side plays and the other sits on the bench, guess who wins? the side who plays. one site has been playing for decades, and the other hasn't. because they haven't been playing, who defined the terrain? even when you're strong, you get to define yourself as a victim. when you're week, you get defined as the monster who is threatening the victim. the israelis have become fixed in the american mind as the of thefrom the time exodus on, which was actually funded as an effort to create a propaganda film more than it was just a movie. it was a clever conflation of the american narrative of the wild west and the poor folks on

the front tier just carving out a piece of -- on the front tier carving out a piece of land for themselves start a new life, threatened by these savages out to get them. they took that model and fixed it in palestine and the palestinians with a savages they were called in the early history , zionist settlers used to refer to them as red indians. people don't recall in arafat's speech at the u.n. that we will not be read indians. people thought it was a slur. it wasn't. he was playing on a theme that had been part of that story for decades. there is a shift taking place in america, and it is a string. -- it is interesting. shift,he demographic clearing among minority groups

who are becoming less minorities, 30% of america, but also young people. young, old on a most every issue, but look at it on palestine, issues involving justice for palestinians, you get almost a red state, blue state, the numbers you use to get on gay marriage, you now get them on issues involving israel and palestine. much partisan, although it plays out partisan, because young people one way, older people another way, minority one way, middle-aged whites on another. -- it is in fact fact demographic more than anything. it is a long-term shift. it is the sort of thing that will play out over the next several decades before you get a decisive change, but there is a change, and it's real. nevertheless, without question

while israel can lose a fight on , israelear arms deal -- with hatwinner in hand and bowing in apology tried to make it up to israel, -- a refusal to apply pressure. it is simple enough going to happen as i hoped it might as the president and congress might pivot from the iranian deal to a move for cobra is of middle east peace. i don't think that will happen. they don't have the wherewithal politically to do it. thirdly, i think that in the political discourse in the united states, one of the issues that has developed over the last

several decades is either perspectives shaped by one of three things, ignorance, will ignorance, or ideology. you have the neoconservative and evangelical right who dominate now on republican thinking. george not the party of herbert walker bush or james baker. it is a different breeds. listen to the debates taking place on that side. .ou have that crowd defining it they don't want knowledge you. they have ideology and certainty, good, evil, we're good, they're evil, and we will be do no matter the consequences. then you have the ignorance which is unfortunately typifying to many in political life. it's ugly, i don't know about it. then there is the will ignorance, the guys who do know, but when they do their political calculation, it doesn't pay.

to be smart on israel, palestine, or any middle east is you, and so they become purveyors of conventional wisdom because if i want to talk about the economy, if i want to talk about taxes, if i want to talk about benefits to the middle class, whatever, this becomes a distraction and it might induct getting me in political trouble, so i know better and i will not talk about it, or i will say what everybody else says, the unbreakable, unshakable ally and hope they will leave me a loan so i can talk about the stuff i really care about. given that, i don't see change possible here anytime soon. the president tried, this may be one of the last presidents for a this who will try, as president tried, both from the time of his cairo speech to when he tried on the anniversary of that at the state department to announce something that was so simple, the 67 border with lance

laughs, -- with land swaps, which was exactly the same language, a variation on the theme of the george bush letter to ariel sharon, which was the 49th armistice line with territorial exchange. as the 19 city seven border and territorial exchange, land swaps. nevertheless, he got pummeled. benjamin netanyahu was invited days later, 27 standing ovations, and the president was .ut in a corner on the issue that has not changed. israel can lose the iran deal, but they can still control the debate on this issue. then shifting to the region. israel is clearly off the rails politically right now. i see no way that a coalition the formed, despite

continued pipedream of liberals here in america that somehow you will form a moderate coalition with benjamin netanyahu as prime minister, not going away anytime soon, there simply is no way to form a coalition in israel that does not have a hard right then. -- bent. even if you get others, they will be used, abused, and cast as in an earlier benjamin netanyahu government. he is a maneuvering ideologue, a clever one. they are resigned to it. we have to understand that there is a pathology that has affected israel and the palestinians, two distinct pathologies. israel is the spoiled child in the equation. they get everything they want, and they know it. they know there will be no punishment for even bad deeds. ae best they will get is

stern, please show restraint and don't do it again, but settlements have tripled since the oslo agreements were signed with no punishment at all. when a spoiled child is bad things it doesn't get punished, it only becomes in a viewing of more bad behavior. israel knows that bad behavior expected of them and ascension sanction for it, so they continue. it has become solidified in terms of the politics of the country, so that you can't move that dynamic easily at all. the palestinian side, the pathology is different, it's not the spoiled child. it is the abused child. the abused child knows that even if i do a good thing i will get punished, so why bother doing a good thing. i will act up. when i act up, get attention. so these two pathologies have become so ingrained in the

political culture of both sides that it is difficult -- i can't see breaking that. as dysfunctional as israel has become, palestinian political culture has become dysfunctional. hamas on one side, political dysfunction between hamas and the palestinian authority, but there are other dysfunctions as well. look, the palestinian authority, which was to be the institution that led to a palestinian state has become a dependency on international donors. and suspend oslo and throw it on the junk keep of history, where many feel it belongs, would mean throwing 100,000 plus people out of work. now understand that when the peace agreement with signed and also, the single largest employer of palestinian people was the state of israel. ony worked across the border , andobs, day labor jobs

that's with her income was. after oslo, there was a ceiling sealing of the- border the resulted in those people losing jobs. because there was no chance to grow the economy dependently -- independently, they became dependent on the creation of a civil service that did not exist in palestine. governmentot a huge bureaucracy, but it was the way to absorb all this unemployed group of people. and so the single largest employer is the palestinian authority. to simply remove all those people from their paycheck would be devastating to over one million people in the west bank in particular, but in gaza as well. , youths this issue despair. think about gaza.

80% unemployment among youth. for the last more than two decades. that means a young person today in gaza has no job, no prospect of a job, no history of what it would even mean to get a job, and therefore the prospect of having a family, a future, simple he doesn't exist. now becoming the situation for many in the west bank, where youth unemployment is hovering at 50%. the fact is that when you take an entire culture of young people and denied them the opportunity to have a family and a decent life, you create the conditions of despair that lead to to this behavior that we are seeing manifested in jerusalem. it is nothing to celebrate that young people are so despairing. it is nothing to celebrate that people are taking the lives of others and taking their own lives in the process. suicide is not a normal human

activity. it only comes when death appears to be a better option than life, that that has become a cultural phenomenon is devastating. it is something that i think we have to understand and deal with. there needs to be a radical transformation of daily life, grading hope for young people. it is not there. the israelis don't see it. the americans don't see it. the palestinians are helpless to do it themselves. [applause] and so, what to do? to pose the weakest party take the most courageous step. i can see far less chance of anything happening here, and anything happening in israel, or the europeans finally getting the guts to act independently and act on their own, or the arabs finally doing something to

take the arab initiative and not just try to sell it, but actually put some conditions on it and re-institute a boycott and do what was done decades ago. and so it falls on the weakest party, but the weakest party has to have a strategy, and it doesn't. it certainly can't be the weakest party should do what folks have been calling them to do here, which is some gestures to the israelis, which only enables bad behavior become it -- because it plays into the israeli pathology. there needs to be a mass nonviolent movement. mass movement,a which is been absent, and it can't be stonethrowing and knife wielding, because when you pick up a stone, they use a rifle pit when you run a knife, they bring in the tanks. when you have a gun, they send in their armies and take over cities again. israelis, it must

require a palestinian movement of nonviolence that is actually a mass movement that invests people and a significant way, and it is up to the leadership to do that. people i think are ready, but people don't have eight leadership that is willing to put themselves on the line in that kind of effort. i really believe that we will not move this equation unless is of the factors in it transformed. someone needs to break out of the pathology and do something different, not going to be america, not europe, not the israelis, but i hope that we can get some discussion on the palestinian side of how to create that kind of movement that can alter the dynamic and create a different future. [applause] ok, just to quickly summarize. i think we heard from both speakers and need to try something different. haveust a reminder, we do what --, and volunteers

walking around for your questions. if you do have questions, send them up now. we do have until 11:30 a.m. to hear more speakers, but we promise to hear relevant questions. matthew reynolds. mr. reynolds: fork you, and thank you anra to participate in today's panel. forhe agency responsible's -- since beginning our operations, five fields of operation, jordan, lebanon, syria, gaza strip, west bank, east jerusalem. if you were given 30 seconds to describe landmarks of human history since 1950, what would you list?

, the cold war, desegregation united states, world,g in europe, arab and of colonialism, apartheid, rise and fall of dictatorships, the berlin ball built up, brought down. -- the berlin wall, built up, brought down. genocide in cambodia. throughout, palestine refugees have remained refugees. here are some 65 years after the , three fronts on what it means to be a palestinian refugee, on the work of bettering lives of palestinian refugees, on being a living reminder of the failure. refugees face and exit essential crisis on many fronts. in palestine, 50 years of occupation. refugee, theing a size of dallas texas, a victim

of a blockade that affects every aspect of one's life and being dependent on food aid while being educated and wishing to be self-sufficient. gaza is on a dissenting path of development. development. the anguish of being denied access to opportunities. being a refugee means being a resident trapped by merciless siege and violence, deprived of basic health. the fear of contracting typhoid is real. you can see the suffering and hunger etched in people's faces. lebanon meanse in trying to cope with the frustration of still living in a miserable temporary shelter eight years after the destruction of the camp. we speak of over 5 million registered palestinian refugees in the region. that equates to the population

of minnesota, colorado or non-americans, norway. the reality is a child of a afghan refugee in the shower of refugeeshra is an 35 years later. exclusion, and, dispossession is a time bomb for the region. reflecting on unrwa's 65 years of service reminds us of the frequent crises faced by the palestine refugees, most recently in the 2014 conflict in gaza. we sheltered 300,000 people in 90 schools. that is the size of geneva, switzerland, being shoved into 90 schools.

we provided life-saving aid to them under extreme circumstances, including the schools,of four unrwa leading to the death of 24 people. essentialling with survival needs, but with health and innovative ways of working have been established. equally significant is something our closest partners underestimated with their support, and i would like to publicly thank the american people for being unrwa's number one supported with incredibly generous financial and political aide, unrwa has contributed to human capital development in the middle east. our health and education standards remain among the highest in the region. 700 schools with 22,000 staff for 500,000 children. if you parachuted the unrwa

system into united states, we would be the third-largest after new york and los angeles. addressing health needs are 131 clinics with 400 staff and an 3 millionnual served. it has created human capital that many countries in the world would today envy the palestinians for. palestinians, and the many others, form an independent state of their own. there is a painful dimension sapping away at this positive development. we are witness to the failure to find a just solution to the plight of the palestine refugees. nothing would be more important perspective of international law and human dignity. it is a matter of common sense in an increasingly unstable middle east.

it is time for the community to address reality through a concentrated in genuine political action. more than anything else, it is insufficient political will and action that has contributed to 65 years of unrwa and refugee status for so many palestinians. even if my agency did not exist, this large-scale community of palestine refugees, which represents 1/3 of the long-term refugees worldwide, would continue to exist and would have continuing needs. one would not wish for a sloganeer to wish you away. it has to be dealt with as a political response. given the multiple crises in the region, many expressed skepticism about a breakthrough. look at the clashes in jerusalem and gaza. ago and it wasys getting worse. skepticism is a luxury the world cannot afford.

the consequences and cost in human terms are too high and are growing exponentially. not acting today when 65% of registered palestine refugees are under the age of 25, when they are well educated, but unemployed, determine to engage, but with few raw specs and limited movement of freedom to do so. lead to despair. we can choose to close our eyes to the problem, but we should beware what the landscape will look like when we reopen them. allow me to conclude with supply, but short terribly needed for palestine refugees -- hope. in august 2014, in the rubble of a damaged unrwa school, a school book was found. it belonged to a young student, aged 11. saidad written a poem and

"hope does not betray." when we re-inaugurated the school, she read the poem. it sent a powerful message to all of us. hope will never die, but it needs a serious, serious boost. thank you. [applause] thank you very much, matt. thank you for all the work you and unrwa are doing. you have been working to very difficult times with respect to funding, but you have done a terrific job, not only in washington, but across the united states to promote the refugee situation of the palestinians. it is my pleasure to introduce dr. imad harb to add his enlightenment on the palestinian mission. dr. harb good morning.

i'm really honored to be here this distinguished panel. although, unfortunately, the circumstances of what we're talking about are not really very auspicious or joyous to talk about, to talk about conditions that are happening today and what is expected to be the future of palestine. i believe everyone has already done a very good job in painting a rather somber picture of what is going on. conditions on the ground in palestine today and the dire situation looking ahead. what i would like to contribute here are some remarks about what my humble opinion i think to be expected for the future of this tragedy, the tragedy of a situation which has unfortunately so far, because it

is going to continue, has lasted for over 67 years of dispossession. we don't kid ourselves anymore by repeating the dashed hopes of yesteryear's in a peace process that can reconcile what has become irreconcilable differences. they are only irreconcilable because the hope for peace has not been allowed to really take root and flourish, despite innumerable attempts that either quickly became. it's or worse -- became false starts or were stopped after a short. period of time. president abad declared that palestine will not abide by any notisions well israel is abiding by what they are supposed to abide by. this was an agreement signed almost a quarter-century ago and

nothing has come of it. another example is the 2002 arab hasue peace initiative that , since then, been proposed and re-proposed and reoffered at every arab summit meeting, only to become a simply mere mention in a news cycle somewhere. conditions present are the following. one, a complete illegal israeli occupation of the west bank and the golan heights to be settled and colonized as if it was uninhabited by people with a national identity and harwich and historic claim -- heritage and historic claim to the land. two, the illegal and inhumane treatment of hundreds of thousands of people trying to

make their daily living. stopped unnecessarily at roadblocks, arrested for showing the slightest freedom of theyent, attacked as collect or harvest from the fields, prevented from accessing educational institutions and health care facilities. there is some background and closure of some of the segments. three, a daily reminder that violence begets violence and the occupation of a people yearning for freedom deprives them of the most basic human right of existence and personal safety. toonational community is busy to extinguish other fires in the area to be able to pay some requisite attention to the plight of millions of palestinians. what in this environment can be a sane or logical or reasonable

projection of the future? here is what, in my humble opinion, is a list of possibility. none of them are palatable to any reasonable human being. closing of al once-promising window, a two-state solution where two peoples live peacefully side-by-side. the many involved in negotiations between israeli and the arab world, the two state solution provided a necessary and equitable compromise and an therance that it can be basis for a peaceful middle east in the future. over the years, many have questioned the efficacy of such a solution. even when it had a reasonable chance of success, it was only announced that it did not provide the necessary guarantees for a secure israel. many opined that sovereignty over jerusalem can be divided. others blamed the division in

palestinian rates as -- ranks that prevented a two state solution. arab hordesarauding jews real were literally used to disparage talks of a two state solution. in the end, the two state --ution was sacrificed descending on jerusalem were literally used to disparage talks of a two-state solution. in the end, the two state solution was sacrificed. two, palestinians living in second-class citizenship, or as much citizen subjects of a state

that stands for easy governance. this will not be a state like that envisioned by palestinian visionaries in 1968 who saw a binational state on the territory in between the mediterranean and jordan river, but one where full citizen and rights are enjoyed along with jews and national rights are reserved for palestinians. suspect israeli will be sanctioned for its support, but also a ground for continued violence. challenge continuing for the zionist movement to decide its nature and goal in light of the division of interpreting its tenets and mandate. the state of israel today shows a house divided over whether to continue in the name of the sinus project, to colonize and project, tozionist

colonize and dispossess an entire nation. the continuation and possible success of the colonizing project in the west bank will mean the defeat of any pretense of a zionist respect of human rights and dignity. subsequently, the defeat of the original project in its entirety. the politics are possible in israel's domestic arena, will likely lead the project to his own demise, but it is interesting in this regard, the seeming nonchalance of the leaders and supporters of the project of this quite possible possibility. four. it would be naïve considering not tosent circumstances think that at least some of the palestinian youth, if not a sizable proportion of it, may see the best hope for restoring extremists is the

ideology that the middle east has dealt with for a long time. extremists are not a response to recruiters capable of weaving a yarn of jihadist, but specifically the brainchild of aspirations for a good life and future. in the absence of avenues of changing the dire conditions on the gaza strip, extremism is likely to flourish to the detriment of everyone's security and peace. five, seeming continued confusion in washington about the road ahead and the unfortunate believe among palestinians and the arabs that the united states is really in and thatole process proves the dispossession of the palestinians and disregard of

their rights, again, to the detriment of u.s. foreign-policy. expediency and pressures cannot be the correct a terminus of foreign-policy of a country that prides itself on its respect for human dignity and rights. happening and will happen in regards to the palestinian question remains at the heart of middle east troubles and essential to the u.s. policy in the middle east and extending to among the arabs and the people of the world, who have, through their governments, palestine as aed member state of the united have approved the raising of its flag at the u.n. plaza in new york. the united states cannot continue to be blind to the fact it is staring them in the face. thank you very much. [applause] ms. fahmy: thank you very much.

now we will hear from tom mattair, who will make comments on the situation in various comments he has heard from the panel. thank you very much. those were four very well-crafted presentations. mine won't be. [laughter] my job is to listen and to tell you what i heard and comment on what i heard. bothhat i heard from areikat and dr. zogby is they are not confident this piece process can be revived by

this and this -- administration or the next one. that is disappointing. agomember a work many years when he talked about the the secondes in year, third-year, etc., of any administration and the eighth year is the best chance for making progress because you had less difficulty overcoming pressure, at least in panelists, these two that opportunity will not be seized by this administration. i understand why. all of them have spoken about the netanyahu government and netanyahu himself, who i agree is not committed to the peace process and not committed to the two-state solution.

2010 that he supported the two-state solution, but i interpret that light of other remarks he has made, such as "i know what america is. america is something that can be moved very easily." in fact, people spoke about the problems, how the promise of the oslo accords has not thinkalized, which is i because it was an interim final goalsd its were not clearly enough. it took so long that opponents of the process were able to mobilize their efforts against it, and one of the opponents of the process was benjamin netanyahu. i think this is really one of

the most serious problems. a piecey can't mediate process when one of the partners is not committed to the outcome that we want. the outcome that we say is in our national interest, and the president said the resolution of conflict is in the national interest of the united states or we have to think pretty clearly about what our failure mean. we have said repeatedly that the butus quo is unsustainable, we are dealing with an israeli government that believes the status quo is sustainable, can be managed, should be managed, because it is better than the alternative of giving up territory. another point i would like to if the this -- even

united states, even if this administration were to try again , i think we are handicapped in and that isroceed because of the people who were selected to do the work. i know many, many, many people in town and in academia who could have been good additions to the american negotiating team over the years and who were never asked. weread, we have people who working on the obama administration's last effort, think fored for i

once, and at the end of it, two think, -- lasted for, i 12 months, and at the end of it, two of them situate this paper -- said to a newspaper after the failure of the negotiation, and said we did not realize that the israeli government issuing new tenders for new housing construction in the west bank would subvert the piece process, or it was intended to subvert the peace process, and we did not realize that the building of settlements in the west bank involved the appropriation of palestinian land. wow. wow. undergraduates who study the subject know that.

two very important people running the program for the obama administration said they did not understand that. --on't know that what you is ignorant or willful ignorance. i don't know. >> it could be just dumb. [laughter] mr. mattair: could be. i don't think we select the best people to represent us and fight for this outcome that we say is in our national interest, and it clearly is. other people have referred to issuect that it is an that resonates deeply with the arab people, and it is an issue that does promote violence and promote extremism and foster extremism in the region. it is not the only issue in the

region, but it is the issue that through which arabs really see america and our real values and real intentions and it is what diminishes their confidence and us and our political judgment, and our actual professions of partnership with them. it certainly is not the only issue that contributes to extremism in the region, it is an not, but issue that contributes to extremism. i will give you one example. some years ago when i was in the ministry of interior and they showed us videos -- i think i may have said this before, this is not my first year on this

panel -- but they showed us video al qaeda were using to recruit people in the kingdom. ofre were photos and videos palestinians bleeding in the streets of the gaza strip and west bank. that does matter to arabs and it will get arabs out of their seats and into one of these organizations. tool.a good recruiting something osama bin laden spoke about. early 1990's, it was one of his motivations. we have failed, in my opinion, and i will leave it to the others talk about what can be done now. but maybe just for the united states, to get out of the way of the efforts of other actors in the international community might be the best thing we can do. [applause]

thank you, tom. we have some very interesting questions here. i will direct the questions to each one of the panelists. you can remain in your seats because that might be the easiest way to answer these questions. jim, if i can note, i love your sports analogy. as one who has worked on the palestinian issue for a long time, i think there is something called moving the goalposts. ,srael, and the united states have been so effective in moving the goalposts. that means there is always an excuse. someone's election, political capital, something happens, the timing isn't right, an american president does not feel it is appropriate and once the goalposts keeps moving, there is no hope for the palestinians. , we haver areikat:

quite a few questions for you, but the questions that keep coming up have to do the future president abbas. he has made statements that he is not willing to continue in his position. what happens to the pa, to the leadership, if there is any sort of agreement between hamas moving forward, what does that look like, and weaving into that question, what about a one-state solution, where israel has to give citizenship to all the palestinians? why don't you call their bluff on that? ambassador areikat: thank you, randa. amave to brag that maybe i maybe the only official in the middle east who is willing to talk about the future of its

president while he is still a president. i think we do have well-established institutions within the plo. is not only the president of the palestinian authority, but he is the chairman of the plo executive committee, but is the highest executive branch in the palestinian political system. there are certain sequences of secession if and when president abbas decides to step down. it is not a secret that he has been trying so hard to hold elections. we have not had democratic elections in more than almost 10 years now. unfortunately, because of the political divisions that exist between hamas and the plo, we

were not successful in having these elections being held. i think the palestinian people deserve the opportunity to exercise their democratic option of choosing their leadership. president abbas is in favor of that and the majority of the palestinian leadership is in favor of that. if and when the circumstances arise, i ensure that our existing political establishment within the plo will be able to handle this issue. i remember before president arafat died, everyone said what will happen to the palestinian people after arafat dies? he passed away and the palestinians managed to handle the situation just fine. as for the reconciliation, unfortunately, nothing is happening in terms of agreeing politically with hamas.

it continues to be a cornerstone of palestinian policy to end these divisions. once again, many external factors are impacting such progress. if it continues, we will continue to exert all our efforts to end these divisions. harb something up -- theed it when he said creation of one national state does not necessarily mean that the palestinians have achieved their objective in terms of political independence and preserving the national identity. i think it will only take our struggle to a different stage, from that of political struggle, people under occupation fighting for justice and freedom, to a

different level of struggle for social justice, similar to the 1948 area. are 67 years after the state of israel continued to fight for equality and continue to resist. we are still committed to the two-state solution. i know again that many are skeptical of what this viewsition, but in our this continues to be most out deal -- most ideal outcome for all of us. ms. fahmy: we can sense the frustration in the audience by their question, so i will give the tough ones to you. we have quite a few questions about the media coverage. there is one asking if there was a massive nonviolent movement by palestinians, with the press

cover it? how can we combat the power of the israeli lobby on capitol hill? one of the questions i find most interesting is how social media is galvanizing international public opinion looked into that. the movement of bds. it's similarity with south africa and apartheid. jim, you have done work for decades with the african-american community and now we see the rise of the african-american community in solidarity with the palestinians. can you comment on that? dr. zogby: thank you. that is the changing demographics on the issue that i noted. movement think the bds is brilliant and is important and is imminently supportable. --l it change the fund the fundamental dynamics in the united states? i don't know. it is the equivalent today of

what my generation was doing with the palestine solidarity and the palestine human rights campaign that i started. people have a different compass. today they have an extraordinarily different compass. they are more global than any other generation. they are more globally-minded to they are more tolerant, andective of diversity, social justice. the way that social media is playing out, which is largely a function of younger people, and the way the bds movement is playing out is a function of that. add to that the role of african-americans, and i think you have that shifting demographic on the issue that i noted. how long does it take to play out? i don't know. what i do know is a mass

nonviolent movement will serve to galvanize and even accelerate that shift in attitudes. having thiser discussion with leaders in the plo over there years ago, and they would say to me, but if we mobilize the refugees in lebanon and marched to the border, the israelis will shoot at us. i said, they are already shooting at you. the point is that you change the dynamic when you use nonviolent means and when you mobilize massively. he problem with the hamas suicide bombers, or the attacks on here, there, or wherever, is because they become demobilizing events. they become the one person doing

factne, not to mention the that in the instance of terrorism, these are immoral and are also heinous crimes. they end up this merging the palestinian cause. they end up making sharon and netanyahu into victims and heroes. they do not deserve to be. what nonviolence does is turns the equation and mobilizes large numbers of people. the press could not ignore that. they could not ignore the first and second at to fought up. it was horribly misguided. the use of violence, you never pick a fight that you can't win. and you can't win that kind of fight with the israeli occupation. it is something that hamas never learned, either. and yet they come out of these turkey shoes, which is what they , a, a cap -- turkey shoots

captive people shelled from the air, shelled from the ground. they killed 17 israelis, and the andelis killed 1400 of them declared a victory. d desperate to you have to be to call that a victory? that is not a victory, it is a massacre. the people are still paying the price for the foolishness of the venture. we have to call it what it is. nonviolence turns the dynamic completely around. it would cripple the israelis. they would not know what the hell to do with it. if they did not have the stones, the they would not know what to do with it. the courageous people are at the wall every week, but it is too small numbers to make a difference.

they are defining a strategy that will work, but there needs to be broader support. all too often we talk about this issue, we talk about justice. ago,ne said to me years politics is not about justice. if it were, the indians would be running america. it is about having power and the ability to use that power to accomplish objectives that you want. you have to find the tool to use, and that is not logic. it is logical. you can think in your mind of how to solve this issue. that to translate it to political power requires leverage. frankly, we are not going to win that fight here. palestinians do have the ability , through mass nonviolence, to use the lever of public opinion worldwide. dynamic to change the and to increase their political power. i rest my case. ms. fahmy: thank you. thanks, jim.

[applause] matt, we've got two interesting questions for you. one is how the educated children of the unemployed adult are registered to vote in the west bank and palestine, were in the gaza strip, so voter registration is an interesting question. have not thought about that. that leads to the idea of upcoming elections, possibly in palestine, and who gets to vote. the next one is there seems to be concerned regarding the funding for united nations, and in particular for unrwa, as the palestinians concede membership in the icc, and the palestinians raising the flag and their move towards a member state in the u.n., the opposition by the obama administration, and the backlash from congress is cutting funds off. thank you.s: unrwa has a humanitarian and

development mandate, not a political one. there are other parts in the secretary-general office. i will pump the first question to the ambassador, because we are not involved in the voter registration issues. we do register palestine refugees, but that is for social other services. unrwa is a voluntarily funded agency. we do not get contributions from the united nations. we are dependent on the world. unrwa is one of the only agencies that is a direct service provider. , whoe other ngos or unicef go out and contract to others, we do it ourselves. staff, about 30,000 doctors, teachers, social

workers. we have faced funding shortages. the world was in tough economic times, and so were we. the needs of the refugees are growing. we have a crisis in every field of hours. war therebefore the were only about 30,000 palestine refugees out of a population of 500,000 that required social services. 10% of your population is disabled or needs assistance. today it is 96% of all registered, of all palestinians left in syria, is about 430,000. just the amount of providing nonfood items, food items, and emergency shelter is great. we did face a very important funding crisis and it brought a lot of challenge to the palestine refugee community in particular, because one of the things they have always been able to count upon his education, and unrwa has always

provided education. because we did not have enough resources to open schools this year, there was a great concern that unrwa would not be opening schools this year, or at least delaying them for a while. it brought a form of credit -- form of credibility and concern in the community. it is a challenge for all of us is more wars take place to fulfill that. we appreciate the generosity of particularly the u.s., which is our number one funder, as they our been very generous to sister agencies, united nations committee for refugees as well. ms. fahmy: thank you very much. imad, i have a regional question regarding the lebanese government and their security might deal with the possibility within the palestinian camps in leaven, and how with the egyptian community

and government do with the crossing and the possibility of involvement of others, including jordan? well, the palestinian situation in all of the arab countries is not good. i know in the lebanese case, palestinians are disallowed from certain -- actually, a lot of jobs, a lot of employment categories. inre is a lot of poverty refugee camps. security forces are outside the camp, obviously. cap security is given -- camp security is given to the palestinian factions themselves to arrange for peace and order within the camps. rubbedes things you

within-- things erupt the camps, and if security officials may be cannot deal with it, maybe they can call upon lebanese police, but in -- havepalestinians in not, so far, have not been a concern as far as the security situation outside of the camps is concerned, although things, considering lebanon and the lebanese state is not necessarily -- can't really stand on its feet because of certain political divisions, really deep political divisions. it turns out that nobody even knows how secure the situation is and the country as a whole will shape up. as far as the egyptian crossing, in the

don't think it is really good for the palestinians. closed then is more open, and it is open only open on certain days of the month. you can only import so many things. things,do certain other and the gaza strip is really starting for anything to be imported into it that has been a resort to digging tunnels and trying to basically smuggle things from egypt into the gaza strip, except that the egyptian authorities have had a problem with trying to maintain the security according to how, number one, they understand it, and how, number two, they need asdeal with it as far

concerns about security across the border with israel. --ther these things can be and egypt has them flooding the tunnels. the last i heard was probably out of 250 tunnels at one time, only 20 of them have not been flooded yet. i'm sure that the egyptian authorities are looking or those , also, to close them down. it is not necessarily just a palestinian-egyptian concern, but also a concern that egypt has to deal with that because of its history with israel. ms. fahmy: we will have comments from the ambassador and a response, and final comments. i have one question for tom. ambassador areikat: thank you. is this working? in regard to the palestinians in lebanon and other host countries, the plo and palestinian leadership has very

toar, unequivocal policy respect the host countries and not to interfere in their internal politics. the situation in lebanon is more sensitive than the other countries. of course, syria is catastrophic and tragic, what happened to the palestinian refugees there, but we closely work with the lebanese government on maintaining order within the refugee camps. we have open channels with them to make sure that no external elements exploits the palestinian presence in lebanon to destabilize lebanon or any other country. we are on the same page with the lebanese authorities on this issue and we plan to continue to be neutral and not to get involved in internal politics of any host country. just to respond to my dear violence, we the have been having a palestinian

leadership since president abbas thatlections in 2005 publicly, and against a lot of opposition from many palestinians, to denounce the armed struggle of violence. even in his speech yesterday, he said we will continue the political, popular, legal, diplomatic battle, and we will never call on people to resort to violence. , theof the escalation recent violence, is happening in occupied east jerusalem, which is totally not under the control of the palestinian authority. i am not saying that those people were not driven and given the reasons by israel to resort to these kinds of acts. forink the starting point

diffusing tension would be for israel to respect the existing arrangement that prohibits extremist and israelis from entering the compound to trade. they have done that at the you ibrahim mosque in the 1970's. they asked for time to pray. divided it into muslims and jews. now they control. as if abraham was not the father of all the prophets. we have seen president in the past by the israelis, and this is their objective. they want to use prayer as a first step, and they want to divide the place, and then they will have total control over it. one step forward would be to stop this provocation, and that would contribute significantly

to the de-escalation of tension and violence in occupied east jerusalem. thank you. ms. fahmy: that is a great segue into the last question. tom, i will ask you to be a psychologist for a moment, because many of the questions in the audience talk about the psychology of the israelis, how they believe truly that this land was given to them by god, that it is a religious attachment to the land, that all of greater israel is theirs. therefore, when the build settlements it is not only their right, but it is not illegal. what would it take for the u.s. administration within security council, within the united nation, the once and for all that in the u.s., illegal?is a matter of it is not viewed in the u.s. as illegal. the rest of the world thinks it is illegal. what would it take for the obama

administration to make that jump towards illegitimate policy to illegal settlements? political courage? ms. fahmy: i'm sorry. mr. mattair: political courage. ms. fahmy: can you say that a little bit louder? mr. mattair: i think it would take political courage. , it wasall correctly our position before the reagan administration that these settlements were indeed illegal. changed that who , and to go back to my earlier remark, i think that was the first administration that had as a prerequisite for its middle east team that they know very little about the middle east. that has been repeated. it is a matter of

international law, the geneva deporting prohibits the population of an occupied territory. they prohibit sending your own population into it. it is clearly a violation of the geneva convention.our decision is it is illegal was a political decision, not a decision based on the law. i come back to political courage, but i don't know how much difference it will make to the israelis, because the whole country is going to the right. certainly, the government is a right-wing government and it comes out of a provision in design us to movement, which is that -- in the zionist movement, which is that all of the land was their god-given right. when i once asked one of the

people in a settlement near hebron, what did he think about the west bank, he said, what is the west bank? i have heard about the bank of mean judaicado you and samaria? that is how the conversation started and it did not end well. ms. fahmy: i can imagine. thank you. i will turn to dr. anthony for closing remarks. this has been in and one session in which various viewpoints, information, thatht, facts, documented have lead to enhanced understanding. specifically, it was herbert hansel who was president carter's legal affairs advisor

in the department of state who was the one who said that the settlements are illegal. even prior to that, the united states is a member of the united nations by treaty in terms of article six. it states specifically that all laws, treaties, and international conventions to which the united states is a solemn signatory are to be the supreme law of the land. and so when the united nations charter specifically addresses admissibility of the acquisition of territory by force. it cannot get clearer than that. and 338,esolution 242 the israeli government has

accepted, which we helped to craft with lord carried on, in the fall of 1967, specifically repeats the admissibility of the acquisition of territory by force, which the israeli government has accepted rhetorically, but implemented zero. ms. fahmy: thank you. thank you, dr. anthony. i would like to thank all the panelists for a wonderful conversation today. although we may not have solved the problem, we raised many interesting questions about the status of palestine. thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> with less than two weeks until the federal government is expected to reach its borrowing that, house republican leaders are readying a vote on legislation meant to avoid a financial meltdown should the ceiling be reached.

the house committee will take up the act once congress returns to business next week, meaning the bill could hit the house floor as soon as wednesday. the measure would allow the federal government to keep borrowing above the debt limit to ensure holders of treasury bonds would still be paid and social security recipients would still get their checks, but with the house still clueless about who is next speaker will be, outgoing speaker john boehner could face a move from conservatives to remove him from speakership immediately if he brings a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling. former defense undersecretary michele flournoy says more women are working at the pentagon. she spoke at a conference hosted school at texas a&m university. here is a preview.

my first tour in the pentagon was back in the 90's. it was kind of a lonely thing, being a woman leader at that time, and so i said let's have a lunch for all of the women leaders in the pentagon. we would sit at one table, and afterwards there were conspiracy theories that the women got together and at a lunch. what were they plotting? what is going on? inn i was in the pentagon 2012, i would say that if you invited all the women leaders in the pentagon, you would overflow the second dining room. that is good. , i at the very highest level was still often the only woman in the room for many, many meetings. i think it is improving in our

agencies, but still women are definitely the minorities. progress since the 1990's. definitely better now than it was. more progress to be made. >> all of our coverage of the conference on women in foreign policy hosted by the bush school tonight and 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. republican presidential candidate senator rand paul held a rally in des moines, iowa, where he addressed students at drake university. senator paul said there was no need for employment antidiscrimination laws for the lgbt community. in the meantime, democratic residents of candidate hillary clinton spoke at a town hall meeting at keene state college, talking with area residents about lgbt writes, energy policy, student debt, and the heroine academic -- heroin

state.c affecting the [applause] [cheering] >> wow, what a group. are we the luckiest people in this state? i'm going to say good afternoon. we made it past morning. thank you also much for being here. i know you have a lot of patience waiting. it is certainly worth it. to be here this morning with hillary clinton. [applause] [cheering]

i am a proud graduate of keene state college, and i want to welcome all of you to this outstanding campus this afternoon. [applause] i also want to thank hillary. i believe this is your third time here in our community to talk with us in a matter of months. we cannot thank you enough. and how about the debate? applause]and and what a great performance by hillary clinton. [applause] and here we have her with us today. you know, i watched the debate, as all of you did. i have to say that one of the things that hillary talked about that really touched my heart and is so important to me is to end gun violence.

[applause] whatever we say today, here, whatever we do here today, will not bring back the lives of those who have been lost to gun violence. and no matter what we do here today or what we say, it will not lessen the pain or the suffering or the grief for all of those families who have lost a loved one to gun violence. so today, i stand here with hillary clinton and support her because of her strong commitment to end gun violence. [applause] it was just a few weeks ago that it was just a few weeks ago that we had another event at a community college. and innocent people lost their lives.

and they did not need to lose their lives. and again, it was because of gun violence. we cannot always change what happened in the past. but we can work hard to move forward to make sure it never happens again. then i am here this afternoon to support hillary, because she wants to act on making sure that we end gun violence. she has said she will fight for comprehensive control of uns. she is going to make sure that our manufacturers and dealers are held accountable for acting irresponsible when they make decisions that put our lives in anger. and she is going to make sure that guns are not in the hands of those they should not be in. like domestic abusers.

the mentally unstable. and violent criminals. we know this is going to be very difficult. there are many forces out there that have prevented safe gun control to be passed in legislation. but the hillary i know and that hillary you know has never ever stepped back because something is difficult, right? jaime plasencia [applause] >> and for that reason and for many other reasons, i am here today to support hillary clinton as the next president of the united states. [applause] >> and it is truly a pleasure today to introduce my friend clay. clay is going to talk to you all briefly this morning -- i guess we are now into the afternoon -- about her own personal experience.

and what the danger of guns have done to her and her own personal life and to her family. let's give clay a great welcome. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for coming and thank you for coming to see hillary. this is really a powerful experience for me. i am also a graduate of keene state college, six years ago. and of the other reason you will soon find out why it is so important. y name is clay lasher-summers. i am honored to be here with you today, introducing hillary clinton. and talking about my own experience as a gun violence survivor and as an advocate. it is not easy for me to talk about my own personal xperience. but it is important that people really understand the effects

that gun violence has. on not only the people that are shot, but on the community as a whole. when i was 13 years old, i lived in westforland, new hampshire. and my stepfather shot me in my bedroom. he would always threatened to shoot me, usually while beating me and other members of my family. one weekend after an escalation of violence, he came into my bedroom and shot me with a .06 hunting riffle, a high-powered rifle used for big game. the bullet exploded in my back. i carry the remnants of shrapnel and bullet fragments with me today. after i was shot, i was brought to the old keene hospital.

that is now the site of the elliott building on this ampus. this is a pivotal moment. not only do we have a gun iolence survivor of domestic violence, this person was brought to a hospital that is now part of this campus. i spent three hours at the elliott building nearly dying. then i was transferred to what is now what we would call artmouth medical center. decades later, i still feel the effects of gun violence and a domestic abuse. feel it like a flashback. with every shooting in new hampshire and across this country. as i stand here on campus, after recent school shootings in arizona and oregon and 45

school shootings of this year alone, i refused to accept that we, as americans, must live in ear of being shot one may go -- when we go to school, when we go to church, when we go to he movies. in our homes. this month is also domestic violence awareness month. it is important to highlight a fact that many people do not realize. nearly 60% of mass shootings from 2009 to midway through 2014, were related to domestic or family abuse. that is why have committed my life to helping others who have experienced domestic abuse and to strengthening our gun laws to make sure that dangerous people, including domestic abusers like my stepfather, to not get their hands on a gun. [applause]

>> now we know that the conventional wisdom is that elected officials cannot go against the gun lobby. because it is too powerful. but that is not true. when congress refused to act, grassroots activist like myself took the fight to states that have passed background check egislation and bills to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers across the country. this week, and the democratic debate -- and this is good news -- candidates for the highest office in this country were asked about their position on guns. and hillary, our leading candidate for president of the united states of america, not only spoke with deep passion about the need to strengthen our gun laws, but laid out her

position on the issue in great etail. and hillary believed that some fights are two important to - too important to give up on. this is one of them. this is not a new fight. but it is a winnable one. hillary clinton has shown to be a champion on this issue. i trust that, as president -- because she will be president -- she will hold the gun lobby accountable. and you will fight to protect americans from gun violence. so please join me in thanking hillary clinton, a true dvocate.

ms. clinton: i think we can all go home now. wow. clay, thank you. i know, as you said, this was not easy to do. but thank you. i want more people to hear stories like that. so that this is not just some political debate about something happening far way. but people can really begin to think about standing in the shoes of those who have been victims of gun violence. and trying to understand what e can all do together. clay survived that brutal, hateful attack in her own home. 90 people a day don't survive because of guns.

33,000 people a year die, by homicide, by suicide, or by ccidents, using firearms. i think we are better than that, as a nation. i think we can do something bout that. that is why i have been talking about it. have been laying out my olicies toward it. some people say that we should not talk about it. some say we should not shout about it. that i should not shout about it. i think we have to keep talking, but more importantly, we have to act. we have to be willing to take on those who are not in favor of sensible gun safety easures.

that includes the nra. and it includes a of people in public life today, who are intimidated. i think that is no longer easible. it's no longer right. what i have said is yes, as president, i will push and achieve universal background checks, something that the majority of americans support and the majority of gun owners support. sensible, responsible gun owners support it. [applause] ms. clinton: the brady bill has kept 2 million guns from being sold into the wrong hands. because of that background

check, despite its loopholes, prohibited purchasers because they were felons, fugitives, stalkers, domestic abusers, people with serious mental illness. have been stopped from buying a gun. as bad as the gun carnage is, i like to think that at least, 2 million prohibited purchasers were not part of that. i also think it is critically important to close those loopholes. close the gun show loophole and the online loophole. back when the brady bill was passed in 1994, online purchases were not an issue. we now know they are. so we have to go for universal background checks and we have to close those loopholes. i have said that if the

congress does not cooperate, i would use executive action to make sure that sellers are held accountable. i also believe we should close what is now being called the charleston loophole. under the background checks, if someone applies to buy a gun, the seller has three days, those sellers that are covered, to conduct a background check and if it is not completed by the end of three days, the purchaser gets to buy the gun anyway. the reason it's called the charleston loophole, is that the killer of those nine people at bible study in mother emoon -- emanuel church in chafrlston got his gun not because he was eligible, because in fact it was learned shortly after, he

was not eligible. he had a felony record. but because of this lophole he -- loophole he was able to go back at the end of three days and buy the gun he used to kill those nine innocent people. nd then finally we have to repeal the broad immunity that has been given to gun manufacturers and sellers in america and -- [applause] -- which has shielded them from any responsibility for their sale of guns and ammunition for -- or their manufacture of of either. now, just recently there was some small slimmer of hope when jury in wisconsin found a

because guns liable of a straw purchase, which the seller clearly knew to be a straw purchase. a straw purchase is you're not eligible, you're a felon, you've got a domestic abuse order against you, you've been committed. remembering the shooter at virginia tech had been committed for outpatient treatment for mental health, still got a gun. but in this particular case in wisconsin, the prohibited purchaser sent somebody else in with a clean record to buy the gun for him. there's video and other evidence that the seller knew that the gun was for somebody else, sold it anyway to the seller. buys it, turns it over to the real purchaser, who goes out nd shoots two police officers. injuring both seriously.

and so when the police officer sued the gun seller, the jury ard the evidence and came in with a verdict in favor of the police officers. now, we're going to see whether that case stands up under the broad immunity that's been given to the gun industry. there is really no other industry in america that has this kind of blanket permission to be reckless, negligence, sell defective products eefpblet it's just outrageous and we have to repeal that so that those who manufacture guns and sell them are held to some standard of accountability. so i'm going to do everything i can in this campaign to not only talk about this issue and

give the platform to people ike clay, who can be much more eloquent than i ever can about why this is an important issue, but i'll also appealing to responsible gun owners. organize an alternative to the nra, which is nothing but a lobby for the most absolutist gun ons that the manufacturers and sellers emand. each -- i'll not against guns. my cad -- dad taught me to shoot when i was a little girl. i've even gone duck hunting, standing in the cold water in he cold sun hd rise.

once -- sunrise. once was enough, getting in that water and beeth -- getting up that early, i'll tell you. but this is the tactics they use, just scare responsible folks into thinking that the black helicopter is going to land in the front yard and somebody is going sthow -- to show up and take your gnltss that is nonintelligence -- nonsense and it needs to be called aught -- out for what it is. but the fight against the n.r.a. should be led by a new rganization of gun owners. i'm collect willing names of people who enjoy hunting, enjoy

target shooting but are sick and tired of the violence. so i am very grave. kelly, senator, molly and to clay for sharing what say very painful personal story to try to save lives and i really look forward to working with a groundswell of people cross our country who know we can do better than this. we are better than this. so with that, let me throw this open to questions on whatever issues or concerns you might ave. > hi, my name is leslie ruhle.

we have snowden on one end of the spectrum and traitor on the other and i want to know where you stand on that. i think, i consider him very close to a patriot and i think the american people needed what he released 478 that's my question time-out secretary clinton: are let me say this. i firmly believe that he could have gone public and released the information about the collection of information on americans under whistleblower protection and he could have done it within the tradition in our country that shields people who come forth acting out of conscience to present information that they believe he public should have.

i do not know why in addition to releasing the information that you're referring to he felt compelled to steal a lot of information and -- that by any definition had nothing to do with american civil rights, liberties and privacy but instead were about trefts and -- just to ations name two, china and russia -- do to gather information about us and what our government does to try to prevent that and to get information about them. so if he had been a whistleblower and if he had confined himself to releasing information that i think did provoke the right kind of discussion in our country and has led to some changes which i approve of then i think people

could across all spectrums say hey, thank you for bringing this to our attention and thank you for gick us the opportunity to spofpbletd because he took valuable information and went first to chine that -- chine ha -- china and then is now under the protection of vladimir putin, i think that raises a lot of questions about everything else he did. so i do not think he should having to return and answer for what he has done. i think, though, we need to continue the balance on civil rights, privacy and security. it's always a challenge and i would -- i do support what the pong passed, the u.s.a. freedom act because i think it did have some good changes and we have to remain vigilant. but it's a balance. it's not all one-sided.

if you go too far toward security you do infringe on the legitimate right of americans and that's what we're trying to end. if you go too far toward privacy and, you know, sirts, you can -- civil liberties, you can leave us vulnerable, and we're trying to prevent -- prevent that, too. i -- so that's the kind of hard-choice balancing act i think president obama has been attempting to do and i support changes he has been making from the executive level and i support the new legislation hat the congress passed. now just a minute, sir. just a minute. i'll get to you, i promise. but i kind of like to go in a broad sweep. but ok, you stood up. we'll hear from you. where is the microphone. just a mifment i mean it's reat having people so eager.

>> after the recent footings, what president obama said is gun control is not enough. what we need is a culture of gun safety and i think we need to add to what we're doing. secretary clinton: i agree with refer that and i like to to what i'm advocating as gun safety measures and the gentleman pakeds a very good point. like so many of you, i am reading news on line and i seed a headline, i think it was in the "washington post," which aid some, as i recall, "toddlers are killing more people with guns." i stopped and went, what? why? because the people whose homes they live in. mostly their parents, sometimes

their grandparents, have loaded guns in their homes, in their cars and children are curious! thed toler in the back seat pick the begun and shooting his grandmother. and the gentleman is buhl right. if you are going to have a gun, please, please exercise gun safety and keep those away from toddlers, young kids and teach a proper respect for guns. one of the worst cases i have read about in the last two weeks is that an 11-year-old boy asked to see the new puppy of the 8-year-old girl who

lived near him and the little girl bhor whatever reason said no, she didn't want him to see the puppy. he went home, got his father's loaded shotgun, he went back and he killed her. so i'll -- all i'm ask i think is pretty common sense. we need new legislation to close the loopholes to remove the immunity from liability, to use technology to get instant background checks for real, not just saying it, but ultimately people, people have to exercise common sense in dealing with these weapons. and keeping them away from children. should be rule number one in my opinion. so thank you. thank you.

this gentleman right there in . e gray clean e your, views on energy but what do you think of shale energy and fracking and gas? secretary clinton: let's give the obama administration a lot be credit for their energy and climate change policy. they've been struggling with this and have begun to come out with recommended regulations like, for example, to control methane emissions.

i think you also have to have very tough water standards. i think, from talking to experts in the obama administration, and on the outside, here is what they have convinced me of. this is the following. there are some places in our country where this extraction technique may be appropriate if we do more research, and figure out how to cut the methane emissions, and keep the water clean. there are lots of other places where it is not. part of what the federal government needs to start doing is drawing some lines and informing states and localities, and we should also never preempt states and localities from saying no. if a local government says, no, not here, they should be able to do that. [applause] ms. clinton: part of the reason why i think the obama administration experts have taken this position is we have to go through a transition. we have to move away from fossil fuels, including gas. gas can be a useful bridge, especially if we move away from oal, and dirtier oil, and some

of the really bad alternatives. we want to keep more fossil fuels in the ocean and under the ground. that is why i am against arctic drilling and offshore drilling. because i don't think we should start that. i'm trying to listen to people who i know care a lot about the environment and climate change, and think about what are the smart steps we can take. in some instances, i can go along with that, and others, i can't. we need to be moving as quickly as possible to 100% clean, enewable energy. we have a long way to go, but that should be our goal, and we should do nothing to undermine or interfere in our efforts to reach that goal as soon as possible. [applause] ms. clinton: the lady in green right there. this lady right there?

>> thank you for taking my question. it is actually a follow-up to that. outhern new hampshire is actually fighting a fracked gas pipeline right now, which i believe you know about. one of our biggest problems is that it is coming through new hampshire, it is not for us, we don't need it, it is for export. one of my concerns beyond the issues of fracked gas is the federal oil commission. what will you do to change ferc? candidates have told us it is a ocal issue, it is not, it is under federal control. what can you do to help us? ms. clinton: you have made a very important point. i did not really focus on this until i've been traveling round new hampshire. the concerns that residents have expressed about ferc really are legitimate. the process that ferc's

employed does not really give enough weight to public opinion, and locations where pipelines are going through. it does not pay, in my opinion, i enough attention to all of the other issues, whether they be health issues, safety issues, and the like. 'm going to do what i can to try to make it absolutely the ase that ferc has to, in any of these decisions, pay much more attention to local communities, and listen to what your concerns are, and do much more to evaluate whatever the consequences, or the downsides f these decisions are. right now, their mandate seems to be only about delivery of energy anywhere, anytime. i don't think that is adequate in today's world. if we are going to have -- what?