backed byonary cause the power of the nationstate. i should have been a tremendous attic of the jcpoa. what are the weaknesses. a tremendouse been critic of the jcpoa. weaknesses? >> the nuclear deal with iran puts around on a path to a nuclear weapon. years, karen will have a nuclear capacity. which means if they do not have a nuclear weapon by then they will just be weeks away from obtaining one. notou assume iran is already having a covert nuclear program. in the past, they have. but until they achieve that status, which the negotiations were supposed to stop them from achieving, not help them achieve, it has also empowered and emboldened iran because it gave them over $100 million and sanctions relief. it continues to help them because they are not facing those sanctions. in theed legitimize them world. many in the time is not on our side. seem like a lot of time in washington, d.c., but it is the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. every day that passes, iran will get stronger. economy will continue to grow if they are not f

right of people to stay as a nationstate with secure borders as well. stability. why not have a referendum on spain? outcome would be complpletely difffferent. theyey are claiming their own rights to live in a country with secure borders, no exclusive rights for single people to depart from it. >> let's move on. the question of constitutional legitimacy to the economy. onia is the wealthiest region in spain but that could be put at risk by catalan baton amis. banks and other companies planning to move there headquarters. >> the uncertainty has prompted businesses to think about whether they want to stay in catalonia. several banks have announced they are leaving. businesses do not like uncertainty. >> business owners don't know whether catalonia is going toto stay in spn.n. ththey are reassessing theirir future. we will always choose the safest option. has mademinister rajoy it easier for businesses to change the location of their headquarters. this will call kit catalonia's movemplicate catalonia's towards independence. exodus going to force catalonian's to think

these are actions coming from a particular nationstate. that we know, what is the responsibility of the platforms? the right are doing thing and cooperating with congress and being transparent and answering questions in being an open source at the ads in who would they were targeted. i have a lot of faith in these companies, but mostly the people that work there to try to do the right thing. what more can we ask of them other than to cooperate? emily: sandberg answered a lot of questions. what didn't she answer? isah: one thing she dodged the question whether the targeting on the ads that ran that were backed by russia had anything related to be targeting of the trump campaign. that is one of the things investigators will look at to try and see if there are any ties to the russian strategy to the trump strategy to see if they were working together. she said when the ads come out, they will release targeting data and i guess we can come up with a conclusion then. emily: looking forward, how big a crisis is it? news,ection aside, fake politi

you have a nationstate in russia that is trying to influence an election. think we need to focus on that as the real problem. i would not hold facebook's feet too much to the fire on this. emily: sandberg spoke in washington. what do we know about the discussions? sandberg explained to them how things were working on their end, the extent to which they have gone into looking at the russian ads. the fact that they realize there is more to do and she is asking for cooperation from the intelligence community. they looked into stuff known from the research -- internet research agency in russia which is connected to the government. they need to know the other places they should be looking if there is more of a greater threat. this is something zuckerberg came out and said after the whole discovery of russian ads is with intelligence communities , around the world, they want to be looped in on what they should be looking for and work with other companies. emily: your former company, google, is involved here. you have fake news spreading and -- across the platform

and they have the resources of a nationstate there is really nothing that you can do. in fact, this is skipping ahead a little bit but a few years ago the defense had a special panel on cyber warfare and they concluded that they talked about in one part the inherent fragility of our structure and it's the same thing that will is where has been talking about since 1967. the fragility of our network and all of the things that have built up over time but [inaudible] they looked at the records of a lot of red team, blue team and the red team was tapped to hack into the command control and they always got in. now the buzzwords and pentagon circles don't talk about prevention really much anymore. you do and you try -- you don't just leave your doors open they talk about protection and resilience. the important thing is if you can detect when someone is attacking you really fast and resilience is you can seek them out and repair the damages that have been done very quickly. that's what they are talking about. the game is lost on keeping people out. i mean, again, you don't wa

and possibly nationstate actors that are intent on destroying the united states and the freedoms we stand for. department of homeland security repertory john kelly stated in april that the most internet threat from north korea is a cyber threat. north korea's in increasingly sophisticated cyber program had the ability to pose a major threat the united states interest. for example, federal prosecutors are investigating north korea or a role in the international banking system for the swift act that resulted in the death of $81 million from the central bank in 2016. in late 2014 computer systems of sony pictures entertainment were infiltrated with was said to have been in retaliation over express outrage over the sony backfill centered on kim jong un. with a growing variety of digital press from the private sector and federal networks, are we prepared to safeguard our infrastructure against a north korean led cyber attack while cyber attacks are a serious risk, we cannot discount other possible threats such as electromagnetic pulse or emp and while some believe as a lowprobability , t

it has been weaponize by a nationstate. it has been amplified by a political party in the united states. we have a president of the united states who flat out validates every point that would defeat it. by calling the russian hacking a hoax, a hoax. the president of the united states saying this considered opinion of the entirety of the u.s. intelligence committee is fake, right? it is straight from info wars. organizations with sketchy relationships. the only hope for it is some light, is transparency. what we are seeing with the investigation is not a matter of if the president of the united states or staff worked with the russians. it will come out of the legal investigation. the public is starting to find realityir perception of can be bent. it can be influenced in such a way they would believe black is white and up is down. we saw it this year. out there waseved hillary clinton absolutely corrupt on the basis of the words emails. ok, she did not have the greatest security practices. but she did. had the drive she short

the machines are vulnerable so if the individual hacker can do this in 90 minutes, we imagine a nationstate like russia if it wished to do so could also compromised the system. we think there is a vulnerability there. we also think they are quite well-known best practices that apply to the security of the voting systems would reduce the vulnerability. in the next year or so, we have time to take remedial steps. host: from martinez, california, ellen, go ahead. caller: good morning. i have a paralegal and work for a bankruptcy attorney. in bankruptcy, you have an attorney, you have the court, and the trustee of the court .i read thethe data disclosure when i was cementing the data online. the trustee account in the cloud was owned by china, london, and washington, d.c. i read through all of the privacy disclosures and what you have to sign off on, on any account when you go on the internet, that you agree to the terms. i read all the terms. that is where i found out that information. the most disturbing information to me was the fact that this cloud operation said that they owned all of the

getting things word you are able to do things that in the white house we have said on th many nationstates can do and clark at the time was chasing osama bin laden and said this will be great for part of my portfolio, cyber terrorism. if they were terrorists they could do acts, so this was the whole cyber war and what it might result in. this one thing thatn. has not panned out yet. i don't think there are any terrorist groups out there that are able to do things as the hackers are getting paid to do things in theey infrastructure. >> is there yet one more iteration where the surveillance becomes a part of the story? can you talk about the impact of the changes and the technology that takes us up that? >> up to about this time, they were intercepting radio signals into that kind of thing. then they noticed the hippies listening towers over the world and certain parts of the world nothing is coming in anymore. they are not getting any communications because they've gone to fiber optics and they have no' to do this. somebody that has been a director before wrote a paper for that classified c

to nationstates that was mostly directed at traditional cybersecurity, account compromise, surveillanceemination of stolen information. it is only recently that we have seen this threat evolved into what we were talking about, what i was talking about in my testimony, the dissemination of information -- misinformation. in terms of specific countries, it really is a global threat. we would certainly be happy to come back to the committee and provide more details on specific actors. >> is that true for the rest of you? >> true for us, as well. as we said in written testimony, we see a disproportionate amount of spam or automated accounts coming out of russia, but our tools and technology are agnostic, obviously. senator graham: could iran or north korea potentially do this? >> certainly potentially. the internet -- senator graham: talk about the time to review city started picking up foreign interference two years ago, is that right? >> we have been tracking threat actors for several years, yes. senator graham: before the 2016 election cycle? >> yes, correct. you findraham: did activity a

and that is not a smoking gun for a nationstate but it is certainly one of the indicators that a nationstateight be involved. julia: and the politics section, the russian investigation is causing the pressure investigation is causing conflict in the white house. carol: two lawyers cannot seem to agree on how to comply with requests from robert mueller. julia: we talked to our editor. >> our lead this week is a look inside the white house office and the fight that is brewing and has been for months now between white house counsel donald mcgann who represents the office of the presidency and ty cobbs was brought in to handle the robert mueller investigation. these are the two guys in charge of defending the president from the russian investigation and they are at each other's throats about how much to share and how quickly to go. and that is really the heart of the piece we are doing this week. julia: cobbs said we would have this wrapped up by christmas. donald victim seems more reticent. why would he be reticent? what does he know? >> is not so much what he knows, but it is how much he might

for the nationstate whereby people seeking reference from all over the world including jews from theheart of africa the only state that absorbs people from the heart of africa to give them a better life or estate which helps syrian refugees by the thousands fleeing through the border in terms of their treatment in hospitals or helping them with food in theory itself. or a state whereby within the parliament of the state of israel things that are said there are not heard in any country in the world including in the middle of the battleground where the members say the harshest and most bitter things against those with free speech under the rule of the israeli constitution go as far as my desk can imagine. or where the parliament that has a brotherhood would present this case in the parliament perhaps the only parliament in the middle east which enables muslim brothers to be part of the parliament which causes the most , located challenges for any democratic society in our country. or a country that debates on the purity of the weapon meeting how do you treat the battleground with rules

and nationstates are doing the same with other countries election system. the fbi does not investigate interference with the german election system. but if there is information that we are attaining about what's happening there, it tells us a lot about trade, methodology and so forth. i was on the phone just before i came over here with one of my foreign counterparts. over in europe. so that is where comparing of notes, it is absolutely essential across all of the different things we talk about, whether it is counterterrorism, counterespionage, cyber, frankly even outside of the national security context. we are in interconnected world in a way that i think is more and more true every day. mr. shedd: another question from the audience, can you tell us about the humanization process and how these 702 information on americans minimize, and what does it look lfo and what does it look like for the fbi in terms of getting access to it? mr. wray: so minimization is jargon. it is a term of ours. minimization procedures are procedures that the fbi, in this case we

it is used by everybody from nationstates to nonstate actors and cyber terrorism. but much like in the terrorism contest, we are sending and testing certain specific email addresses that we think may be tied to cyber activity that is related to a security investigation. that may lead to again, just like in terrorism, we are getting tips by the thousands. we need to be able to figure out which ones need to be prioritized. it is a similar concept in what i was describing. >> i think director that your observation about the information sharing, admiral rogers talked about the russian cyber issue and the report from late last year. the community issued and how important having o2 in its generic form obviously could not give us detailed on that but that information sharing crosses the boundaries of foreign and domestic. i'm sure it is of tremendous value. in terms of see what nsa is focused on while you are adjusting that as well. >> that is true in a lot of different ways. i mean, just to pick an easy one to describe. lots of people are focused on efforts two metal wit

we can look at a a number of nationstates who have been trying to influence the u.s. elections for years. they have just been doing it in other ways. now we have given them in thiso particularly do that. but perhaps there's other elements as well, criminals, terrorists groups. many of them are generally accepted i believe by the community in the know of having the wherewithal, that is, the sophistication, the money, the wherewithal to actually pull this off. use okay, still it's hard. how would he do that? they would have to do one voting machine at a time. they are spread all over the country. not really. if you go back to the limited target set, , they're coming frm four different manufacturers and the supply chain is a great kind of infection vector for them to do that. even within the supply chain there so many opportunities. it could be done with an insider just for money. they could care less about the u.s. we just paid them off. change the former, change the chip process, change that software. and fighter could affect huge, huge numbers of chips and things whic

this has been weapon nice by nationstate. it has been amplified by a political party in the united states. we have a president to flat out validates every point that would defeat it. by calling the russian hacking a hoax. the president of the united states actually saying the considered opinion of the u.s. intelligence community is fake. right. that straight from info wars. or breitbart. organizations that have sketchy relationships in any way shape or form. the only way ten that is transparency. what was the now isn't a matter of determining whether the president works with the russian, that will come out in the legal investigation. but the public is just starting to find out that their perception of reality can be influenced in such a way that they would believe black is white and up is down. we saw that if anyone out there at any time ever believed that hillary clinton was absolutely corrupt on the basis of the word e-mails, okay she didn't have the greatest software security practices. but the hard drive she had to destro

we are modeled on the nationstate model as we develop our collection of rarities and so, we are well along the line of refining that so that we have the policies and understanding about these nonstate threats so we can apply the same could work against them that we do against our stated intelligence adversaries as well. > w\e have to make sure we move -- we have to make sure we move at the same speed and against it as well. >> are we able to keep up technically do you think we can stay ahead of the curve given all these attempts to expose with capabilities are and what very sophisticated actors are trying to do to us? >> you talked about one of the challenges on the small businesses before i did this. there's always a crisis of the day and a demand for resources. continue to invest in the piece of technology that will deliver five, ten years from now or the director after the director of the occupied the incredibly privileged role that i have today. we are making sure that we have to anddone and we are every bit the equal, but we've got to make sure today we are not equal and there i

one state sponsor of terrorism cannot hide behind its nationstate status while, in effect, it is actually a destabilizing revolutionary regime. in europe for the first time since world war ii, we have seen national orders changed by the force of arms, as one country proved willing to ignore international law and decided to veto authority over its neighbor's rights to make decisions in the economic, diplomatic, and security domains. in the pacific, we have seen north korean provocations threatening regional and even global peace, despite universal condemnation by the united nations, so this is the reality that faces our department of our like-minded allies, and we must have militaries fit for their purpose, fit for their time, in these days of emerging challenges, and these challenges include new do manes of conflict, -- new domains of conflict, including space and cyberspace, with attacks even on our democratic processes. your department of defense is adapting because we do not want to be dominant and at the same time it are relevant, and i offer this statement for what do. how do we main

given that it is possible that nationstates are going up against some of them in the sony case. it is very unlikely you are going to see the government lean forward and get into the are and start day managing the messaging that happens in the private sector, and be protecting the cyber security more than what homeland security and fbi are already doing. questionascinating about the differences in our societies. i would say that same separation between the private and public is not true in russia. i don't think they would view it that way. so i don't hold that much hope, nor do i think it is necessarily appropriate for a government to get into the business of determining what the sages are and are not put out there in the public media. up with i could follow that, so we're not talking just about messages in any normal way. i mean, we are talking about it as an instrument to do something we have already discussed is either akin to war or achieving their political goals, so we know it is driven by a nationstate to do us harm. does that still mean -- >> well, i want to come back to

the nationstate actors have investigated... invested heavily in cyber espionage capability.the information is held now. the skills of the hackers are rising. the organisations is rising. i can say that the defenders, particularly in the major western nations, and china and taiwan, are getting much better at defence. it is an arms race but it seem that the bad guys have the edge right now. stilgherrian, technology reporter, speaking to rico of little earlier. forgive me if you are eating brea kfast forgive me if you are eating breakfast right now because what i am about to tell you is rather disgusting. specialist teams are trying to remove what's called a fatberg, an enormous solid blob of oil, fat, cosmetic wipes and diapers, blocking an huge length of sewer underneith my feet right here in london. 0ur science editor david shukman reports. in east london this morning, chris casbolt embarks on one of the worstjobs in the world. he checks a sensor that will detect toxic gases. he's given a constant supply of fresh air. this is what's needed to fight what's called a fatberg do

so would once have been an internal eu discussion is now between the eu and a nationstate, that seems deal with its citizens' privacy. we heard in the report that the worry about information, background on individuals being harvested and held, but when you look at the threat faced by the world, including countries in europe, can we simply not be squeamish about this? i think you have to wonder what government powers have got, because none of us want to end up in a situation where some right—wing government, 01’ some very left—wing government then starts to misuse information in a way we don't anticipate. it is important that we worry about what they do. tim is right. the world's preoccupation has shifted. we don't know who are members of isis or al-qaeda among the million refugees who came into europe last year. and it is absolutely right systems would demand it, the eu should be intelligent about following this data. britain wants open borders... it is a trade—off, isn't it. there is no way to get a position happy for everyone. that's all for now. thank you to all of my guests, in pa

they are no longer a somewhat nationstate and that is good news for everyone.tting some coverage in network media, it is a big story but it is a really big story. a major threat to the western way of life the last three or four years. is it getting fair coverage? >> i don't think it is. the media does not want to cover anything positive towards donald trump. this is quite positive toward his policies and they are ignoring it. something else to pay attention to. donald trump gave an amazing speech about how iran is the real enemy in the region and right now the uranian led militias which are more properly called terror death squads have won the kurds, the us needs to look at whether we need to support the kurds against what is actually an iranian incursion, after this when against isis. jillian: how do we when that piece and don't lose it? >> we need to get the uranian influence out of iraq. it is a tyrannical influence on the baghdad government in iraq and there are i rgc terrorists donald trump designated in iraq running shia militias that have been shooting c

agenda in the region and we are all too often seeing the challenge in a 1-dimensional way and of nationstatesand relationship with our friends in the region is paramount but only a small part of what the uranian offensive looks like. when we reduce it to terrorism, violence on the ground, we are missing this whole other panoply of hybrid war, political action, subversion, bribery, corruption, this is a broader agenda, our own ground game in order and challenge some wrappers and picking them from afar, looking at things like fpo designation or money, small elements of a much broader array of uranian tools they are using. >> the eyes of our allies in the region like saudi arabia and egypt for example, they are well aware of the uranian role in the middle east. >> they are but part of the problem is they have been consistent in what they are doing. we are starting from behind until a few months ago, we had an administration that talked about sharing the middle east, equilibrium in the middle east, which would mean a percentage gained by iran in the region and that is what we are seeing. >> how d

. >> do you have any clearer sensei of who's behind this, the nationstate or criminal organizations andtive was? >> had another good sense. >> one option to replace the number, a fingerprint or iris scan. no two humans have the same but the scans are not foolproof. >> even though it's a part of me and his unique to me, it is digitized, for it to be compromised and reused exists. >> other options include a public private key or token not unlike a credit card through the chip would contain a huge number of virtually inhabitable spirit they would only need a pin or password to unlock it. if compromised on a new card with new numbers could easily replace it. another option is new technology called block chain, a network of many computers per data is transmitted and stored simultaneously in security and hvac checking the other with algorithms that cannot be controlled by any one device or compromised at any one point of failure. >> the white house now beginning the process of moving towards a new social security system that is safer. the cybersecurity coordinator asking all federal agencies

alex: the companies are not going to make deals with nationstates, or indeed with the european regulatoryrities. what is going to happen is there will be a change in the law at that level. we know the european parliament can be very slow moving when that stuff happens. the fact is, apple is not the only company doing this. there are of course, issues with amazon and others and companies outside tech. cory: and what is a fundamental issue -- how has apple been taxes andirt these follow the law as they see fit, but not pay the same amount of taxes as companies based on the continent? alex: apple, what's happened historically and the whole issue of contention, bone of contention last year, was that they were paying essentially a license fee for intellectual property which was held in different geographies and that was why they said, we're not actually generating any profit in this country. the profit is being generated by another unit elsewhere. that deal actually ended several years ago, so apple is now for this year and last year, for example, paying the higher tax rate. the issue then com

it generates has enabled us to generate unique insight on the transfer of weapons from certain nationstates around the world, to other parties that would do harm to our nation, as well as those of our friends and allies. with the information generated as a result of this statutory authority, it has enabled us to take key isis leaders off of the battlefield and we have been very public with -- one issue we have declassified. he was the number two commander between 2014-2016, we the u.s. government writ large has spent almost two years trying to locate him. posted aly as a nation multimillion dollar bounty, a reward for information leading to his arrest or death. despite two years of that, we were unable to locate him. because of -- we derived through hint, iot our first will not go into all the specifics, but we will try number 4 now? the light says it is on. [indiscernible] [laughter] admiral rogers: ok. you guys keep trying. i apologize. ok. um, so this statutory authority enabled us to take hegemon off of the battlefield. the number two individual in isis, we were looking for him between

taubman: lennon wanted to set up more than a nationstate. he wanted to set up an international stage. he believed that all of these countries, former countries, coming together would form a kind of colonel of the world he wanted to see come about in the end. nations joining together in the spirit of proletarian internationalism. there was an element of compulsion and force. ome were forced to join. others were given the idea of independence. the national anthem, a parliament. sometimes a foreign minister. but it was phony because the real power was in the hands of the communist party which was quickly centralized. host: the language, i want to run a clip of mr. gorbachev when he came in for the interview and the question had to do, can you speak english? >> do you understand english? >> to some extent, yes. when one meets with people often and when you talk about things as you would translate it being translated, you begin to learn. it is a teaching process. host: language or you said you and your wife speak russian. tell us what jane, your

he wanted to challenge the whole nationstate system that been put in place by colonial powers in the middle east. he really wanted to create this clash of civilizations between what he believed was a muslim community and the west, and he wanted to impose a big economic cost on the united states for actual of interventionism in the u.s. picky to look at each of these goals and say he's made 15 years later, maybe some progress has been made on some of those things. how do you, is this movement that al-qaeda started, is it succeeding or is it being pushed back? is it failing? >> so i think the features of bin laden calls you laid out, those are all fair and they show up and some of the papers coming that were covered up of the rate in about a bod -- about a bad. i think the picture layout is a valid one. but there also has been tremendous strife and division amongst the movement it's self. you see the very nature of isis is, comes from a schism with al-qaeda central. but in support of your theory, professor, we have -- >> hypothetical. >> yes. is what it inc. will likely be borne out, w

first of all, if it is a nationstate they have that. they don't wake up all of a sudden. they have time. work it the scope of took a long time. right now, i would say that we have less than half an hour. i 10:00, ate door 11:00, it was supposed to be the introduction speech. at the time one machine had already so. the guys who did that said, can we show it? no, i need to go -- i want to -- he was at the speech for 40 five minutes comic came back. at the same time, he was from denmark so at the same time during the speech another person from northern california hacked one. when the introductory speech was over, already too machines had fallen. this technology is very old. for a lot of people who were there, they were not even born when most of these came about. people on twitter were asking for tools to do this. aret of the current tools not that much behind. these tools came to be -- cost $15 may be in new york. very old technology. some of the findings and there are so many things but one thing is we followed vulnerabilities which have not been studied before because of

this has been weaponize i a by anstate -- weaponize nationstate, improvised by political party in the united tape. we have the president of the united states who flat out validates every point that would defeated, recalling the russian hacking a hoax. hoax, the president of the united is actually saying that this considered opinion of the entirety of the u.s. intelligence community is fake, right? that is straight from in for wars or breitbart. -- infow or breitbartars. organizers that have a sketchy truth.nship with the what we are seeing now with the investigation, is not a matter of determining whether the president of the united states worth with the russians. that will come out in a legal investigation. to public is just trying find out that their perception of reality, can be bent. they can be influenced in such a way that they believe that black is white and up is down. , that ifat this year anyone out there at any time ever believed that hillary corruptwas absolutely on the basis of the word "emai l." it actually happened. drives that she had to destroy, she destroyed in accor

businesses, given that nationstates are going up against some of them, as happened in the sony case. will see they you government lean forward and get into the private sector and that happenssaging in the private sector and be protecting the cyber security more than what homeland security and the fbi are already doing. it is a question about the differences in our society. that separation between the hybrid in public is not true in russia. -- between the private and public is not true in russia. is appropriatet for the government to get into the business of determining what messages are and are not put out there in public media. we're not talking about messages in any normal way. we're talking about as an instrument to do something that you have already discussed. it is achieving their political goals. we know it is driven by nation-states to do was harm -- to do us harm. >> i want to come back to something. al qaeda cannot destroy america. only we can do that. we have to look to ourselves, and how fractious we are. i look at it like a bee sting. someone has an allergic reaction that

that's not a nationstate. we already know that they are in 20 of our states. we know that from the reports that a a been in the newspaper from the intelligence community. all you have to do is go into certain precincts, you don't enough to change the outcome of the actual vote count. you could just eliminate every tenth registrant, every tenth registered voter. so when mr. jones shows up on election day to vote, i'm sorry, mr. jones, you are not a registered voter. you multiply that every tenth th voter, you've got absolute chaos in the election. and on top of it, you have the long lines that result, and as result of that people are discouraged from voting because they can't wait in the long line and so forth and so on. this is the ultimate threat. i said so many times in this committee, vladimir putin can't beat us on the land, in the era, on the sea, under the sea or in space, but he can beat us in cyber. and to hand out a five year old data chart as to how we're going to fix the situation just is totally, totally insufficient. i rest my case, mr. chairman,,

3000 utilities, some big, so small and are going up against a verse of his get at pacific these nationstate hackers have much more sophisticated operations and utilities are used to. we are asking big and small utilities to come up with solutions on very rapidly changing technology. one of the things the government can help to do national ads can help to do, partnerships and up is identify a template, a solution, cookie-cutter solution that at least could be a starting point for these utilities and they need assistance in implementing it and maintaining it. that doesn't exist for those utilities. >> senator duckworth, thanks for the question. i wouldn't be here today without the support of d.o.e., california and some of the funding so i'm very appreciative of that. for me i think the funding is critical. that's a holistic approach we need to take. there's no one technology that's going to solve this problem. we talked a lot about networks today with the dark fiber and the quantum, but we also still need automation to give respond to these things in a timely fashion and to support the growth

nationstate. in his speech today at the un, he used the word sovereigntyat t because he makes the point that this is not going to be one world and if it is, we want out. they live in the authoritarian countries, so when the united states votes in the un it represents 330 million people.ep when china votes which represents about eight and whenn the rush of votes it represents putin. and how can you equate them as an equivalent, give them one vote each. and his point is that national sovereignty, giving people the right to control their ownin destiny through their own country is the foundation of the government and of our political fury. the whole idea that if you make money in a democracy can be taken away but if you live in an authoritarian country what is the point in private property someone can just come along and see get away from you and therefore the fundamental element of the market economy doesn't exist in three quarters of the world in his point is we don't want to go to their level. we w