welcome to kqed newsroom, i'm thuy vu. gunmen stored a hotel in the west african nation of mali opening fire and taking hostages. when the siege ended hours later, more than a dozen people were dead. an extremist group led by a former al qaeda commander has claimed responsibility for the attack. the siege in mali took place eight days after islamic state militants launched a series of coordinated attacks across paris that left 130 people dead. this individual i don't obtained by dailymail.com shows people diving for cover after a gunman opened fire into a cafe. those attacks set up a massive global manhunt, a strong military response from france

supported by other countries, including russia, and a fierce debate about whether to allow syrian refugees into the united states. here to discuss the obama administration's response to the attacks and its political impalestinians areongressman eric swawell, a democrat representing hayward and pleasanton. a member of the house select intelligence committee. scott shafer, senior editor of kqed's politics and government desk. congressman, given the latest attacks how confident are you in the obama administration's strategy for fighting isis, al qaeda, and other extremist groups? >> isis' attacks on paris and taking down a russian airliner and a bombing in beirut proves it's serious and it's time to go back to the drawing board. we need to hold a summit with every nation that has an interest in scrubbing isis from this earth and we should not assume what we've done in the past has been working because isis has escalated. today, just as we are mourning

the week anniversary of the paris attacks we see that another enemy has reared its head. al qaeda killing dozens in mali. so i think we need to have a coalition summit to talk about what we're going to do. >> a worldwide summit? >> yes, of the countries interested in getting rid of these extreme groups. >> i wanted to ask you about something that happened in washington yesterday, the house of representatives passed a bill that would w prohibit syrian or iraqi refugees from entering this country unless the department of homeland security, the fbi, and the director of national intelligence all agree that they are completely safe and do not pose any security threat. you voted against that bill. why? >> the security of the american people is my top concern. and right now certainly we should have a real eye scrutiny on any refugee that comes to our country. however, we've already been doing that. we have accepted thousands of syrian refugees into this country. we have accepted about 2,000

this year. only 2% are unaccompanied males. and we have had zero arrests for terrorism. so i trust the process that is already in place. but i worry that if we add additional layers of bureaucracy, one, that we're going to inflame and i think further motivate people to engage in terrorism, so i think this helps isis. isis can't get here right now, but they want us to overreact. i think this helps isis do that. >> you think this is an overreaction? >> i think adding layers of bureaucracy to a system that has not been pron to have fault is an overreaction. i think until this system that we have in place proves that it doesn't work, let's keep it. if it's not broke, don't fix it. there's been zero arrests of syrian refugees in the united states and there are thousands here today. >> this refugee debate is playing out in state politics. 31 governors across the country have now said they do not want syrian refugees in their states.

governor brown says he would allow them to come to california, as long as certain issues are addressed. what are those issues? >> well, security. the governor pointed out monday in a statement that california has always been a place of asylum and he thinks that should continue with proper vetting. but just to make sure he was on the phone tuesday night with other governors, most of whom were republican, with the white house officials in the administration and they had a lot of questions. he had a lot of questions. how many refugees are we talking about? there's already 179 in california. how many more do you think will be coming? where are they going to go? how will they be tracked when they get here? governors, politicians generally, but governors, mars, executives don't like surprises. they don't want to find out after they get here or the day before refugees arrive. this is a very hot political potato. and while the governor wants to be supportive of the president's policy, he also wants to make sure he's not left holding the bag and he did his due diligence

in making sure that everything can be done to screen these refugees before they come here. >> congressman, are you surprised by the intense reaction to the refugees? >> i think people should be concerned. especially until we find out about this attacker in paris who may or may not have come through a refugee migration. yes, we should be concerned. but we should also trust the systems that have already been put in place. and that means that right now it would take 18 to 24 months at the earliest for a refugee to get here in america. and that's after already going through intense screening in either jordan, turkey, or other country in the middle east where they begin. and fbi screening and department of homeland security screening in the united states. i think we are a country that has always been compassionate. it is our nature to accept refugees. i have a chief of staff who came to our country at 4 years old fleeing vietnam. and his mother handed him over

to her brother, not knowing if she'd ever see him again. so that's what these refugees are escaping. and that is powerful. and they're not coming here for a vacation or a handout. mode.e in surviva and we have always been a country that reaches down and lifts them up. >> regardless, though, it is becoming a campaign issuegn on e national front, in the presidential campaign, with donald trump coming out and saying that he wants all muslims registered in this country. there's been intense reaction and resistance to that. it's also playing out in state politics. how is it -- how do you think it will play out here in california? >> we got a sense of that yesterday. the house bill that congressman swawell voted against to basically shut down the arrival of the syrian and iraqi refugees. about 50 democrats joined republicans in voting for that bill. eight of them were from california. two of them at least are in potentially very tough races for

re-election next year. bara in sacramento, peters in san diego. six others, most of whom are in kind of purple districts. jim costa in fresno. raul rue wiz in the central inl empire. they're worried and they want to be cautious and not get too out in front in supporting president obama's policies because they know that god forbid something were to happen in this country, even if it didn't involve a syrian refugee, some kind of a major terror attack here would not help this debate in terms of being on the side of being more open and welcoming to refugees. >> you know who's been welcoming to refugees, france. the country halves justthat was attacked. pier in the said they're taking 30,000 more refugees. that's how you respond to a crisis like this. you have systems that protect people but show you're not going to be intimidated. i think by trying to have layers and layers of bureaucracy that say, we're not taking refugees,

that's saying we're going to be intimidated and that's not who we are. >> i want to go back to something scott brought up, god forbid there should be a terror attack here, however, that is on people's minds. what can law enforcement in the u.s. do to prevent homegrown attacks? we've seen lone wolf attacks, not always organized cells. >> i spoke this morning to hundreds of police officers who gathered for porac, the police officer research association of california. statewide association of police officers. what they want right now is to make sure that intelligence that our federal officials have is being passed down to them so that they know what to look for. just being told to be on high alert isn't enough. i know the fbi has been reaching out to local law enforcement to make sure that this is the case. i think that's very much appreciated. if they know what to look for, especially people who could be radicalized on the internet, that's helpful. because they're going to be on the front lines in the homes, able to maybe stop the next attack.

>> these are things that they can look for. what about those things they can't look for? which is, we get into the area of encryption. apple, google, other silicon valley companies are facing intense criticism for creating encryption software that makes it impossible to read communications between suspected terrorists. you can't prevent what you can't see or read. where do you stand on that? >> 21st century technology has allowed a lot of the prosperity we have in the bay area. it's posed great challenges for law enforcement communities. i think right now we have to balance the privacy of individuals and the right of these companies to, for data security reasons, encrypt devices with law enforcement's need to know if bad people are communicating about trying to kill innocent people. i happen to believe that we need better intelligence on the ground, we need better relationships with communities that could see these types of cases develop. but banning encryption in the united states does not ban systems like telegram or viper

or tang goe or overseas-based encryption services and it would drive u.s. companies overseas. i don't know if banning encryption is necessarily the answer. >> scott, senator dianne feinstein has been among the harshest critics on this encryption issue, going after silicon valley companies. what does she want the companies to do? >> she wants to have -- she wants them to cooperate in the fight against terrorism. part of it this is encryption issue. last year a lot of the these companies, google, android, phonemakers and apple changed their operating systems so that even they could not get in to see what kind of messages were going back and forth. there's about 30 different apps that people can download that are encrypted already. and so she wants them to be more cooperative. and wants to enlist them, basically. they're very resistant to that. it's bad for business or it was before paris to be open and helping the u.s. government. that may change in light of what happened in paris.

>> all right. thank you body for being here. thank you both. enlightening discussion. congressman eric swawell and scott shafer. according to the united nations, more than 4 million people have fled syria since 2011 when the civil war there began. the mass migration has been called the largest humanitarian crisis since world war ii. as you heard the obama administration's plan to admit up to 10,000 syrian refugees here is facing opposition from democrats and republicans alike. my guest cara ferguson has helped syrian refugees settle in california. she is with the international rescue committee. welcome. >> thank you. >> explain the process to us. who makes the determination of who is a refugee and what is the criteria? >> sure. so the first step is through the united nations high commission on refugees and they establish the criteria which is individuals or families who have fled their countries due to a

well-founded fear of persecution due to five reasons, either race, religion, nationality, social class, political opinion. if the person is going to be reviewed for resettlement to the united states, then the united states becomes involved in many different areas. >> and then how does the u.s. vet them and how long does that process take? >> sure. the process is a lengthy one. and it starts with an intense review through the department of state oversight refugee resettlement support centers where refugees are interviewed, background information is carefully collected, and then that is reviewed by department of homelanpasecurity. they come and actually in person interview refugees. fingerprinting is taken through the fbi and other agencies. >> and it takes on average at least 18 to 24 months, is that right? >> absolutely. yes, at least 18 to 24 months. it is a long process. and carefully done.

>> and do people fleeing syria face an extra layer of security? >> well, individuals throughout that process face extra levels of security at any time that there is going to be additional questions about security. >> many migrants flee their homelands with little if no documentation. they're fleeing war-torn countries. they leave with almost nothing. they often come from countries without robust databases and tools which would make it easy to perform background checks. how do you verify the statements that they make to you? >> sure. this has been a long process and well established. and it does start with very individual interviews, intensive interviews, multiple zeus. and then a check of a variety of data. if the people have family members, for example, in the u.s., then there's dna testing. so there's so many ways to verify and look at what an individual is providing to put that record together. >> i want to also ask you about

a new bloomberg poll regarding public sentiment about refugees. it shows that 53% of americans don't want syrian refugees resettled in the u.s. while 28% support the obama administration's resettlement plan. and 11% say only christians from syria should be allowed in. what is your reaction to that? >> well, first of all, for our offices, the calls that we have for the past even several months since we've been much more aware of the syrian crisis has been overwhelmingly about support. and i think that right now we are trying to sift through as citizens in this country a variety of questions. and so we need to have all of the information to be able to make good decisions. but what we have s en are incredibly welcoming communities that want to help people that are fleeing. >> how many syrian refugees has irc helped resettle in northern

california and how do you decide where to place them? >> well, they're generally placed with their family members. so the united states as a whole has taken about 2,000 individuals. irc has a whole nationally has taken about 270 individuals. a much smaller number of those have come to northern california. >> what are some of the biggest challenges they face when they arrive in this country? >> i think they face what every immigrant faces here. which is that they are starting life generally with one suitcase, a family of seven with children from infants to teenagers. family members who have been business owners, who have been educated, now they're starting their lives over in a new country, a new language. >> that's got to be so hard. >> it is a challenge, yet the beauty of refugees is that for me they really embody the american dream. they come with such gratitude. the security and safety that america can provide. and ready to become part of our society. >> and just real quickly, of the

2,100 refugees that have been admitted to the u.s. over the past three years, who are they? are they mostly women and children? >> absolutely. always through the u.s. process that is the most vulnerable. famies, women, children, disabled, medically ill. >> karen ferguson, international rescue committee, thank you for joining us. >> absolutely, thank you. last week two alameda county sheriff's deputies were caught on tape severely beating a man they caught after a high-speed chase that began in san leandro. this surveillance video was recorded in san francisco where the chase ended. the incident is now the focus of at least three investigations. kqed news reporters have been following this story. alex joins us now, thank you for coming in. who was this man who was beaten and what has happened to him since? >> well, he's 29-year-old

stanislaus petrov, born in odessa. he's been hospitalized since this beating. >> and what are his injuries? >> he underwent surgery on wednesday for what's been described as multiple fractures to his arms and his hands. the information coming out of that based on the fact that he's still in custody and also health privacy laws, i'm getting secondhand. but my understanding is that he may lose complete use of at least one of his hands.s. and he's been severely injured. not to mention head injuries too. he suffered severe lacerations on the back of his head. some swelling. but the extent of whether he has a severe concussion or not, that's not really known yet. >> so give us some background on this. what led up to this incident? >> it started in san leandro, across the bay from san francisco. alameda county sheriff's deputies approached petrov. he was in a car that had been

reported stolen. they made contact. this was all according to the alameda county sheriff's office. he rammed a couple of their squad cars, managed to get away. injuring a deputy in the process. although i hear that deputy is okay. then led them on a high-speed chase to oakland, back onto the highway -- >> across the bay bridge and into san francisco's mission district. and that's where we see the video. that's where the video picks things up. how long did the beating go on? can you tell from the video? >> you can't tell exactly because it skips. it records in about 10-second chunks and then stops recording for approximately 10 seconds. on the video it plays for about 35 seconds or so. and according to the san francisco public defender who originally released this, who was contacted by a witness who found this video, the beating is about twice as long as what you see. >> so the video is pretty hard to watch. we can hear petrov, his crs of

pain in the video. was he resisting arrest at that point? was he succumbing? >> that's going to be at the heart of sort of the legal issues surrounding this case and this very brutal arrest, right? the way that the law works is that officers are only allowed to use the appropriate amount of force in the instant that they're arresting someone in order to control them, in order to keep themselves safe and the public safe. whether or not petrov had already surrendered at the time that he was tackled, punched, then repeatedly beat with night sticks, over 30 strikes, just what was recorded, that's going to be an important legal question as this plays out. >> who are the two deputies seen in the video doing this beating? and what has happened to them? >> we don't know their names yet. as of sunday afternoon they were put on paid administrative leave, meaning they're no longer on active duty.

but they aren't suspended either. and they have not been arrested. the alameda county sheriff's office initially said they were going to release their identities on monday but has since said they've been blocked by doing so by a legal challenge from attorneys representing these deputies. >> so who's investigating? there are at least three investigations? >> depending on how you count it, sure. the alameda county sheriff's office immediately on friday after reporters brought this video to their attention launched an internal investigation. that's an administrative thing to see if the use of force followed policy and could result in discipline. there's also a criminal investigation under way in san francisco. led by the san francisco district attorney's office. and the sfpd is playing some role in that. the federal authorities are also aware of this case. the u.s. attorney's office, the fbi, the state attorney general's office as well. but they're not playing an

active role yet that we know. >> just real quickly, i know you in oakland today, mr. petrov now has an attorney representing him? >> yes, he's retained a civil rights attorney. there is speculation, feelings that this case raises substantial federal civil rights issues. and so that is something to keep an eye on. but it's not going to happen right away. all the criminal issues have to play out first. >> we can probably expect a civil case to come out of this. alex emsly, thank you. >> thank you. we're going to end on a somewhat lighter, more musical note. a piece of renaissance-era music is captivating audiences in san francisco. the choral work is currently on display at fort mason. experience the music but you won't see the performers. instead their voices will appear with stunning clarity right over your shoulder. here's canadian artist jenna cardis on the inspiration for her sound installation.

♪ >> it's an audio installation that consists of 40 speakers. and out of every single speaker is a singer's voice. ♪ it's a virtual choir singing a piece of music from the mid-1500s by thomas talis. i was attracted to the music because of the complexity of it, 40 different harmonies. the emotional beauty of it. i thought as a sculpture. so when you walk into the space, the sound is so three-dimensional for you that it's like walking into a piece of music. ♪

the composition is composed of eight different choirs. each choir grouping is bass, baritone, alto, tenor, soprano. people might hear a sound and a voice coming from their right. then they'll hear the music move to their left. then back and forth. sometimes it's almost like ripples in a river, how the sound moves. the recording of the salisbury cathedral choir, everybody was miked. at one point one of the little girls had to go to the wash room. so i said to the sound recording guy, just keep rolling. so you had all these people talking about the weather and clearing their throat.

basic human stuff. i realized afterwards this little bit of intermission was so important because it made the people into real people. you hear of breath collectively of 40 different singers going, aah. then their voices become almost angelic. ♪ >> i've listened to it a number of times in different parts of the world. it's a very simple piece. if you just look at 40 speakers standing in an oval. if you listen to the music it constantly changes your perception of it. the complexity of it is mind-boggling. janet cardiff is one of those artists you cannot identify as a sound artist.

or a visual artist. she's just an artist working with those media. and deeply interested in the way that voices and narratives can affect you emotionally. >> my partner george bruce miller and i worked together for a long time. a lot of our works deal with ideas of sculptural sound. but also ideas of intimacy. and ideas of narrative. we did another piece in a forest where we had 24 speakers on the trees. so we mixed a whole filmic soundtrack with a choir walking through the forest, planes going overhead, trees falling. so that you never knew as a viewer when you're sitting there what's real. >> exhibiting sound as sculpture is something that you haven't really seen very often in

museums. recently it's become much more common, in part i think is due to the success of artists like janet cardiff. >> the 40-part motet is shown through so many different countries all over the world. almost 50 different types. it showed in new york, ps1, two weeks after 9/11. and we didn't realize it would have such a potent effect. and the room it was installed in was very similar to the room here. and people just stood and listened to the music and looked at the city. and they wept. it was really amazing. people need this emotional release. they need to have this ability to be in the moment and to feel this sense of presence and spirituality that music like

this brings to them. >> that was mesmerizing. the 40 part motet open wednesdays through sundays at fort mason center through the month of january. it's free but you do need reservations. for more information, kqed.org/arts. that is it for now. i'm thuy vu. thanks so much for watching.

the following kqed production was produced in high definition. and their buns are something i have yet to find anywhere else. >> i'm not inviting you to my house for dinner. >> breaded and fried and gooey and lovely. >> in the words of arnold schwarzenegger, i'll be back. >> they knew i had to ward off some