and in addition to being a nationstate threat and it was very highly destructive with the data. going your office, turn the computer on, there is a skull and cross bones, and all the hard drives were completely completely destroyed information stolen, a lot of private information stolen that was leaked. that was very sophisticated highly destructive attack on our constitutional way of life. what is a proportional response? i don't know, jim talked about their motion picture industry. it is a hard question to answer, but i think it response is necessary, whatever that is. maybe you have all the tools in the toolkit that you look at but you have to have some response. i would say hitting them economically would be a good response. you talk about stocks net, and i -- you talk about stuxnet cannot go into detail about that, but i think a cyber attack merits a cyber response. it's a deterrence. if they do that with impunity, without any response, it's just like my kids, you have to have discipline and a deterrence to stop them from continuing doing this. i think at one point at some

if you go back to family history and you look back at when nationstates have lacked capacity on their own, in the early days of the american revolution, we had not yet gained the foresight to gain a navy -- we turned to the private sector and said we will allow you to take that private ship you own and, acting as an agent of the state, if you will go after those british ships, we will give you legal protection. we will let you sell the cargo and take some of the monetary profit from that. so we have done this before. in general, i am not a big fan of going that way. earlier today, i was looking at some analysis on some entities that are already out there offering a wide range of services. i'm not sure that in the long run that is in the best interest. ok, shawn. in recent testimony before congress, you called for more offensive capabilities. what exactly does that entail? the point i was try to make in my testimony last month was that i believe that a defensive only passive strategy is not in the long run going to deter nationstates and groups and individuals from engaging in some of

that is something we are going to work on, legislation to greater define when you have a nationstate attack, like in the case of sony, which is north korea, when you have a nationstate, what is the proportional response. host: thank you. >> chairman mccaul, thank you for your comments. in d.h.s. today, you have an undersecretary, general taylor who is probably the most knowledgeable and understanding individual relative to information sharing, and with his time at dhs, with his time at the state department, the overseas security advisory council and the private today, . how does he handle this with a staff of 300 people? he cannot process the information that he needs. the f.b.i. has 10,000 analysts he has 300. it seems he is a much larger task in front of him but does not have the resources necessary to accomplish it. what can you do to help them make that happen? chairman mccaul: frank taylor is doing a fantastic job. the challenge for intelligence and analysis is not to compete with the intelligence community and duplicate efforts, but rather provide a unique product that dhs can

when you have a nationstate attacking like cases or you have the force out of iran that is a nationstate what is the proportional response? >> thank you for your comments. in dhs today we have an undersecretary, gen. undersecretary, general taylor, probably the most knowledgeable and understanding individual relative to information sharing with this time in dhs this time at the state department the overseas security council and the private sector. how does the how does the accomplices when he has a staff 300 people? he cannot process the information he needs. the fbi has 10,000 analysts. he has 300. he has a larger task but does not have the resources necessary to accomplish it. >> well, frank is doing a fantastic job. the challenge for intelligence and analysis is not to compete with the intelligence community and duplicate efforts but rather provide a unique product that dhs can provide primarily through overseas tsa screening in airports and customs and border patrol and secret service area at intelligence can create a unique intelligence product that then they are more interested in.

there is no while you can build high enough for deep enough to keep a determined nationstate out of your you need to think of this as an area of risk like any other. when neither has been a big push to make sure the cabinet secretaries, deputy secretaries are in the room when we talk about cyber security risk to government systems. too long it was a cio issue. part of its language. we don't know how to talk to each other. when the tides talk to the general counsel who is not in the tech sector, they don't know what you're talking about. we need to learn how to bridge that gap between technical experts and those who understand business risks. emily: one of the biggest risk is their own employees. that is in fact the biggest threat to a company's security. edward snowden was a government contractor. how likely is that there will be another snowden? guest: absolutely. i'm glad you brought that up. when we talk about the risk to a country, they are still sending traditional spies here. they were looking to use greed or sex or event as a motive to flip people so they could get economic espion

we're seeing time and again companies penetrated by either criminals were nationstates overseas thataling information for economic value but also to cause embarrassment or color version. the sony hack was a real wake-up call to a message we have binge ryan to deliver for a while now, which is that it does not matter your industry to you are at risk of a destructive attack. for too long the information technology issues, cyber risks were assigned to cyber professionals. the ceo general council did not understand the risk and thought maybe if you had the right tool you can block all attacks here you cannot. there is no role you -- no wall you can build high enough or deep enough. if you need to think of this as an area of risks to mitigate like any other. we are not perfect and government. there lately has been a big push to make sure the cabinet secretaries or the deputy secretaries are in the room when we talk about cyber security risks to government systems. for too long and government, it was a cio issue. part of that is language. those talking in bits and bytes and they try to tal

is there information for the -- is a discussion of consideration for the emergence of corporate nationstates and how will we act and respond to those? cindy, are you here? cindy. i want to make sure i am getting the question. is the question focused on the idea about how our corporations going to engage in this world? >> the potential threat of companies actively seeking participation [indiscernible] michael rogers so talking about : the hack back type of idea corporations. >> [indiscernible] michael rogers: check. in broad terms, i am a believer that the application of force, whether it is in the kinetic world the weapons we are familiar with and through capabilities in the non-kinetic world, our best applied to the nation-state. i am not a big fan of the corporate world taking on this idea. it is not without precedence. if you go back to family history -- if you go back -- i'm a big fan of history and look back at if you when nationstates have lacked capacity on their own, in the early days of the american revolution, we had not yet gained the foresight to gain a -- to gewe turned to the ,

if you go back to family history and you look back at when nationstates have lacked capacity on theirn the early days of the american revolution, we had not yet gained the foresight to gain a navy -- we turned to the private sector and said we will allow you to take that private ship you own and, acting as an agent of the state, if you will go after those british ships, we will give you legal protection. we will let you sell the cargo and take some of the monetary profit from that. so we have done this before. in general, i am not a big fan of going that way. earlier today i was looking at some analysis on some entities that are already out there offering a wide range of services. i'm not sure that in the long run that is in the best interest. ok shawn. in recent testimony before congress, you called for more offensive capabilities. what exactly does that entail? the point i was try to make in my testimony last month was that i believe that a defensive only passive strategy is not in the long run going to deter nationstates and groups and individuals from engaging in some of the behav

president said he want to see -- he wants to see more legal -- is there support for that from nationstates? max: that is one of the more complicated topics. what more complicated than the search-and-rescue thing. of if you want to apply for -- if you want to apply for political asylum in the european union you have to be on european soil to do that. in order to avoid that you have to set up some kind of center for migrants or potential migrants to apply for asylum. you can't do that in countries like libya, because it is a ailing state. that is why they are thinking about doing something like that. the will doesn't seem to be there to do this in a fast or effective way. it is the same way with a settlement of migrants that make it to the european union. you have 28 member states and they are clearly not on the same page concerning those topics. brian: max hoffman for us, following those emergency migration talks for us today in brussels. he will talk to you later. -- we will talk to you later. to qualify for refugee status members need to prove they were persecuted. matt: our reporter rg i

european union, to see if it can be made to fall apart, so that russia can deal with individual nationstates, rather than with a larger coherent entity. laila: does the current cease-fire deal a truce in name only? is it worth the paper it was written on? >> these things are certainly worth trying. i think the way to understand what is happening is, it's a challenge for the european union and its leading member states such as france and germany. therefore, it is appropriate for the prime minister of germany or the president of france or leaders of other european member states to try to negotiate these deals. but the fact that they cannot work, the fact that the russian side, even in the truce does not accept responsibility for what it has done, that is a lesson to be learned. all in all this is a challenge for the european union. it can't really be solved in ukraine, since the russian effort is not only directed against ukraine. it is directed at the european union. we will see whether the european union can decide what's important for itself. laila: in the past couple of days, kiev has laun

it's in the public sector of the nationstate and the crucial role of the family. >> host: one of the things that you emphasized you called him a revolutionary christian and christian bluesman commanded is obvious that he is a minister to us all but in some ways it can get lost and it seems to me part of what you assert here is that it was critical to the radicalism, talk a little bit about that. you only sell out when you are experiencing the spiritual blackout. when you reach the conclusion is about only that is available in the time of space and i'm going to get as much as i can. and the kingdom of god has become. it's become a commercial. no. the community has become an advertisement. martha comes along and says love and behold, i am a jazz man, improvisational using any web and i can anyway then i can to empower these poor and working people beginning on the side of town. because you love white brothers and sisters. that's a beautiful thing that shows a spiritual maturity. he went to jail because he loved black folk. he's in a wagon, talk about four and a half hours in the dark o

>> portugal is the oldest nationstate.a lot of common knowledge and a lot of common sense. you know moderation is the way to rule the country. we never have the temptation of extremist solutions. so i think you know, the effort was so strong and the result is very good, so we deserve a better term and i think we will have it. mark: we went greases reshuffling its negotiation team as it tries to get that bailout money. will this be enough for greece to reach its agreement with creditors? >> i am very diplomatic when i talk about other countries. we all want grease inside euro. euro has rules and guidelines. it is on the greek side to deliver reforms and solutions. i can just give them the portuguese example. we face past times. to consumers and 2008 off the norse, we have explored record after record, 2014. the portugal economy is back. we have to face structural reforms, flexibility on labor, corporate past reduction, fighting against bureaucracy on licensing, to give an example. mark: are you comfortable the role of the b

we are seeing time and again companies penetrated by either criminals or nationstates oversees that arealing information for economic value but also to cause embarrassment or coercion. the sony attack was a real wake-up call and a message we have been trying to deliver for a while now. it does not matter your industry, you are at risk. emily: what our companies doing wrong? cory: -- john: for too long the cyber risks were confined to the i.t. professionals. the ceo and councils did not understand it as a risk. i thought if you have the right tools you could block attacks. there is is no walls you can build that is high enough to keep them out of your system. we are not perfect and government. lately there has been a big push to make sure the cabinet actor terry, or deputy secretaries are in the room when talk about cyber security risk to government systems. for too long and government, it was a cio issue. part of it is language, those talking in bits or bite and they try to talk to the ceo, they do not want -- know what you're talking about. we need to learn how to bridge the gap betwee

the nationstates managed to exploit the networks. in the meantime the defenses have lagged behind. these intruders change the tactics by masking their identities and usually they are operating beyond the reach of the u.s. authorities area to china, north korea iran russia are one of the most advanced of the cyber adversaries with groups to acquire the cyber attack capabilities. the threats are escalating in the sophistication and destructive potential. we are confronting almost dalia with frightening presidents including the nationstates launching cyber attacks on our own soil. this happened at least twice in the past year. the director of the national intelligence recently revealed that iran was behind a devastating 2014 cyber attack on las vegas the world largest gambling country. north korea were famously used the digital bond to destroy computer systems like sony pictures, the attack that was not only destructive but was a cowardly attempt to intimidate americans and to stifle freedom and speech. the cyber intrusions are felt across america from the kitchen tables to the corpor

chemical threats that can inflict catastrophic consequences, and we discussed the risks posed by nationstates. the first panel was just about threat awareness. the second panel was prevention and protection. we asked a series of panelists to give us an overview on everything from biological arms control and cooperation with bilateral and multilateral agreements, to first responder protection, and agricultural defense. and we took a look and assessed our ebola and influenza response capabilities and are -- our capabilities with pathogen. the third panel was about surveillance and section and the understanding of the biosensor he requirements -- biosensory requirements in this regard. we looked at early detection and early diagnosis. we took a very interesting look at the human and animal interface as it relates to our charge on this blue-ribbon panel. today, we got a very lengthy group, a significant group of subject matter experts talk about recovery and response capabilities. we think we have cover the waterfront front threat awareness -- from threat awareness and response to everything in b

isis wants to create a caliphate , taking over real nationstates. philip: i would not have thought of that 14 years ago at the threat table. charlie: go back to yemen. you have the iranians rebels overtaking the government through the houthis, people we thought were on our side correct? philip: whatever our site is. charlie: we thought they were friends. on the other hand, you have iran, which is the mortal enemy of crisis. they sent their own top general into iran and damascus using hezbollah in syria to fight isis. philip: i look at this and say one of the problems with isis -- you would say the enemy of our enemy is our friend. we should be in with the iranians because we have a common enemy. i would say, hold on a second. i think iran is a democratic society, a great culture. they have a different worldview than we do. but part of that worldview would be to say once a shia government takes control in a place like iraq, it is not one man, one vote. it is not the american idea of how you run a democracy. it is not necessarily sharia law, although

they get the same status as a nationstate to privately enforce the terms of a public treaty.t is called investor state dispute resolution. if you want to learn a lot about it, go to i sdscorporateattacks.org. it is a new website that has all of these cases were corporations are empowered to drag a sovereign government to a tribunal of three private sector trade attorneys who rotate between being the attorneys for the corporations suing the government and being the "judges." no, what of interest rules. these private corporate attorneys can order a government to pay our tax dollars in unlimited amounts to a foreign corporation because they think that our domestic environmental land-use zoning health labor laws violate their new corporate rights in an agreement like tpp. the thing is, we have a path full of those kinds of agreements already. under nafta, we had some horrible cases. 400 million dollars has a ready been paid out to corporations. even under nafta were the system is now our them what is proposed, for tpp, but there are very few companies from the countries with had

it's not going to work in the advanced nationstates were terrorist groups so we have to be agile and we are still fighting that fight. we are getting better but still not good enough. >> good morning mr. secretary. i am from the george washington university. my question to you is what does the administration and vision for the united states army and asia and what are your concerns in the findability with regards to the continued crisis in the middle east? >> with me take the second part of that first further rebalance to the pacific asia. it is as simple as this. half of humanity and half of the economic activity in the world upon which we depend is in the asia-pacific region. so much of the future lies there so it's security and our role in it are central to the american future and you have to keep that in mind even though it's on tv every night is the middle east and that's where there's a lot of violence and i'm not belittling the importance of that but when you think doing strategy have to remember what the fundamentals are and one of them is that this is an important part of the

the organization seeks to destroy the norms of nationstates. they want to create a paradigm where diversity is not allowed. in relation to iran in our relationship with baghdad, somebody asked me today, a journalist, about the iraq-iran war. iraq still has major challenges with relation to the 1975 algeria agreement. we still don't agree to sign it. now, after 12 years. so that i think is a clear sign that and issued -- an issue -- here is an issue of nationalism. we have a need with iran. we have a desire as a neighbor. as much as you have mexico and problems with immigration or canada -- i don't know what problems you have with canada. perhaps none. mr serwer: we have fought several wars with them. ambassador faily: canadians want to be american and americans want to be canadian. that's another issue. it's not that we don't want them to get involved. we do want them to get involved. but do we want them in control? no. last week, our prime minister met with the leaders of congress at the summit and said to them, in my recent discussion with ir

the organization seeks to destroy the norms of nationstates. they want to declare their own par paradigm where diversity is not allowed. in relation to iran in our relationship with baghdad, somebody asked me today, a journal list and about the iraq-iran war and others. i said to him, by the way, iraq still has major challenges with iran in relation to 1975 algeria agreement. we still don't agree to sign it. now, after 12 years. so that i think, is a clear sign that an issue -- if we have control as people talk about that surely we would have signed that ages ago. so here is an issue of nationalism. and we wouldn't. we have a need with iran. we have a desire as a neighbor. as much as you have mexico and problems with immigration or canada -- i don't know what problems you have with canada. i hope none. but let's have that. >> we've fought several wars with them. >> canadians want to be american and americans want to be canadian. that's another issue. but as much as that problem, we have with iran. it's not an issue of we don't want iran to get

met vick and how world order happened how the treaty of her side how the west alien system of nationstatesen now many years later, he is still able to apply the rigorous intellectual framework in this world. >> host: do the clintons hold that the clintons sold their fame or? >> guest: certainly. they are running for president. bill clinton has that. when he comes to the aspen institute we have, as i say people of both parties. but even the republicans in our audience asked even when bill clinton is there doing his tour of the world than just answering questions and remembering everybody and having read wonky policy papers on how urban revival happens in older cities and how the creative class moves in or how micro-payments help women in indiana. he understands and knows more than anybody else and is absolutely hypnotizing when he's giving a dissertation. so he has that definitely. >> host: latecomer stand to retail california. thanks for holding on. uri with walter isaacson. >> caller: hello mr. isaacson. i'm 15 years old. before i ask a question, i would like to say i'm in favor of the da

you need to find governance solutions where people feels a part of the nationstate.hey are prepared to work with these solutions. there are things that are embedded in the constitution. i think the political arrangement work that we did in the balkans, creating a situation in bosnia where serves and muslims -- serbs and muslims could live together. i want to see what syria is going to look like in the future. we talk about who we are going to give arms too. how are we going to determine if they are moderates? are we going to give them a questionnaire to determine who is a moderate? instead of talking about who we are going to arm, we should think clearly about what syria should be after the conflict here it conflicts to end. it does and. then you have to have government solutions. i think that's lacking in terms of determining what syria should look like in the future. host: ambassador christopher hill, we always appreciate the history of the insight. klees -- please come back and once again. guest: my pleasure. host: coming up next, we will revisit this question tha