Also very glad to see jim phillips. Ive worked on terrorism issues that must be a quarter said tree now it there are very few people in the world who write with intelligence jim does. Heres a couple reasons i wanted to write this book so i will start with the way counters on the citizen. I remember reading some clips in the newspapers in the chicago area. A woman was looking out of her window and she saw a man pull up and in that van there proved to be nine different people and they looked rather like an athletic team, the jogging uniform, but as she looked out her window, mrs. Jacobsen decided she should be a little nervous about this. There have been some robberies in the area by puerto rican separatists, and she noticed a few things that were offered to her. First of these athletic bags seemed heavier than she was used to seeing traffic leads and second, some of the guys were smoking so she decided this wasnt a workout at all and she decided for a minute she would call the police and she interrupted and Armed Robbery plotted by nine members with two others nearby. And there was a cache of weapons and to shotgun and all that and these all went to jail. Although oddly enough at the end of his tenure, president clinton pardoned a bunch of them. One of the policemen who was there at the time that they all felt lucky that they. And one of thhe and one of the a newspaper reporter wrote that this happened during a routine traffic stop in both of the accounts are correct. It was walter jacobson. Ive been unable to find her first name, but she broke an attempted robbery. The greatest import by a terrorist who went to jail thanks to her intervention so you know that phrase now. It started in a dork and its kind of a nationwide push to the department of Homeland Security that if you see some, say something. I like the phrase, and i think it captures the sense that we as citizens have both a duty and an opportunity to be citizens in cases that do touch on the specific securities. I like the slogan more than i do so. You will often see signs around military bases that say if you see anything that looks at all suspicious, immediately report to authorities. I would say its better for the public to contemplate a little bit to ask themselves what they are seeing and not to jump to the confucians to quickly but that responsiveness among the citizens i do think that by and large citizens have some understanding that they are involved in some ways. And i wrote in part to tell the stories of some citizens who have been involved and in good ways. In the spirit of mrs. Jacobsen for example there was another person that was a part of the community in new york, and no one ever has reported this person is although there is a book on the case. The person suspected in watching some of the men who had come back in mid2001 and come back from contentious times overseas, she felt that they were up to some data things. She wrote in a troubled english to the authorities and that she ought to look up to these men who had come back because this person seemed to feel that they were a threat to the community. And he or she was absolutely right and the authorities did look into it and they have not only been abroad to southwest asia, most of them have been in a camp run by the afghan knees and Osama Bin Laden and they were there for training. I got another kind of category besides these persons about privately and quietly and another sort of group that we have him on the us is those that have tremendous physical courage and may not be looking for trouble that seem to show the right attitude and response when the alarm bell sounds. When we go back to 9 11, we go back to the way those in charge down the aisle of the United Airlines flight over pennsylvania. They knew from the cell phone traffic would have been to new york city when they did that and they were sort of coming though, minutemen accept the analogy fails from lexington. But we think that that is pretty unusual and it is especially in the airplane situations for decades to come. Fullstop authorities was always the same. Stay very calm, stay uninvolved, dont make eye contact, do what they tell you. But these people knowing what they did on that day made a different decision and it was very heroic and in the sense that since then, 2001 and 2009 we had a passing or subdue other terrorist, richard reid and they were both treated and with material you hope to blow up planes. This does go back a way tha wavu may remember her a little bit. She was Central European and a citizen to 40yearsold. It was her fate to be the lead stewardess on twa 847 and they have taken people hostage. They were working a kind of perverse psychological approach to breakdown the passengers whipsaw and everybody into confusion and sub session. But she was frightened naturally but gradually her composure would be turned into she began thinking about what she could do to moderate this impossible situation. That became the only common language actually that all of the parties had and she intervened sometimes psychologically sometimes physically. They were long in the drama of this hijacking and she did so very strange. And they both showed an aging courage in the twa in the 40s and hijacking. I suppose we all admire this kind of thing and whether we would be up to it ourselves. These people prove themselves up to the level of events and extraordinary person to. The third category i got to look at is more predictable. The tried and true professional, the persons trained to do the kind of intervention that sometimes happens, and its not very often that they are involved. Not everybody in the business of Security Private or public like the topoftheline some might seem like Airline Passengers some of them might be very good but only in five years will they really know all their trade. But otherwise we meet in public life. Many people involved in the security business and proven themselves to be capable. They rise to the moment. Maybe it takes you back to far but a remarkable location in new jersey is one of the things that makes the book for a paragraph or two. He took notice of a driver as they are trained to do and he pulled them over for him over g violation that he saw through the windows that there were materials on the back seat which he distrusted and so a simple traffic stop turned into an arrest. The man they caught that day was a member of the Japanese Army which had trained with many other international took her wrists and he was there on his way to new york to get a navy stationed and this was going to be the twoyear anniversary of the bombing and libya in 1986. And that station being bombed by the review. 1995 you may remember that Timothy Mcveigh came close to a scapegoat for the state line after bombing the Oklahoma City building. He was caught by a patrol man who noticed the simplest of things he didnt have proper plates on his vehicle and he noticed it when they were passing like this on a highway in a very highspeed so he swung around and he swapped and he was a trained patrol man so rather quickly he assessed within the jacket a pistol so they had a talk about that and he said my sidearm is limited to come into the patrol man said so is mine. After a wild terrorist got into his car and flew back to the station and then came word up there and returned to his vehicle because the long training taught hi talking withs the suspect has material you can learn to walk from so he looked in his car and sure enough he found a Business Card and it said military supply company. That was how full and no one at the time knew what he had just done in Oklahoma City. They were only learning about it and never thought to connect him to it. They had triggers about what would come in the year 2,000 customs inspector in Washington State had somebody coming over the border and he got nervous after too many questions and altered from the car and diana probably saved Los Angeles International airport from the bomb that they were intending to deliver. It also includes a story and it is a long one that has been nicely told in a magazine story about john oneill. We all look back to those after 9 11 and connect i at all the ds and fbis john oneill is one that did so, remarkably well trained in thoughtful. He believed that al qaeda was coming back to his city and he knew about 1993 he suspected another attack would come on those buildings and he did everything that he could to move the fbi along towards recognizing the threat and he did that liaison and the white house with overseas guests. He was the kind of cassandra and he kept warning about us. Eventually he got discouraged and he retired from the fbi and he took a job as the head of security in the center in new york city. So he turned up in august of 2001, and he kept that job only for a few days and he was on the scene and he so that kind of citizen is one reason i wanted to write the book i wanted to write this book to talk about the way that we do have a grand strategy in our fight against terrorism and i dont think a lot of americans know that work over the pieces and i tried to lay some of those out to help the citizens kind of develop a full perspective on what the public business has done by all parts in this. In that respect than a couple assumptions, the book starts with the idea that terrorism is a real thing and a bad thing, and actually in the Academy Overall accepted propositions. I used a definition from the think tank. This isnt mine but its always guided my scholarship and that terrorism is a deliberate and systematic murder and menacing of the innocents to inspire fear from the political ends. The terrorist threat that we face is explored in the book and certainly it starts with al qaeda but then theres also broad enough to bring in the other hostile political and religious stuff we see. It is a premise of the book that we are in fact at war with corelle qaeda. Now we can find quotations from the white house saying that they lead with that but i would argue that in the last year there has been some doubt on the question of whether we are at war with al qaeda. I argue that we are and ought to be but i think it is a bad thing that become in the western how long this would occur for reasons i built it into. The central part of the book look set to strategy. What are the proponents of it and how does it work. Athe white house and the Nationl Security Council will always have that central coordinating role in making off of the agencies Work Together if they can handle the bureaucracies respond. And its not easy s so its a candid account in the book of how hard it is to do this, no matter what party is in office or who is in charge. So you might have, for example, the Commerce Department in the business of promoting exports very reasonably but wants them to do that and get there could be tension in the dust might be eager to put sanctions on a particular business or a particular powerful individual, maybe a state sponsor of ticker resume in a time when it is not convenient with respect to diplomatic initiatives. Our intelligence agencies certainly differs legitimately. They can quarrel about a suspect and priorities. There is a new book called the treasury is more who has a lot of experience in this and he brings up one case in which intelligence is closely watching a whole terrorist math work some place but at the end of the time they have to have a meeting with the justice to wrap these fellows up and take arrests. And one or the other has two stand down. The dod has their differences. I think for citizens we dont see how many overseas personnel we have that are not military. For example, the Drug Enforcement agency has a remarkable International Network, which is very active smart people. They go through many of the same finest schools in the states but other experts in security do. And the fbi has some locations overseas as well and has a spot basis in a lot of crime scenes and they are extremely important so there are some stationed overseas and many that go there on a contingency. Even the Police Department to go back for a minute has a remarkable Intelligence Organization that probably was contested initially by folks like the fbi and cia. Buthe cia. But they felt that the federal government wasnt going to defend very well then after 9 11, they needed to set up their own defense said they would put listening devices out on parts of the world they think are dangerous and they do this through all of the appropriate proper channels but they are trying to watch the world in a way that they dont like. So if they are doing well they will sort of moderate these problems when they are federal. The book has several groups on each of the major elements of the strategy. So diplomacy, public on this it is a good place to start. We know terrorism is very political and its usually International Diplomacy therefore has prospects. And diplomacy has done well in some this is the Irish Settlement from 1897 and killed 2007. From the multilateral diplomacy involving a lot of the irish and british players but a lot of outsiders including americans like mr. Clinton and George Mitchell and a lot of others from around the world. A bilateral also has some success i will mention in a minute with respect to the libyan problem that we work with the United Kingdom, but also in the book i throw some cautionary note because going to the conference is as you do and started listening to the discussion and watching the way talking to a terrorist has become one of the hottest fields in my business in terrorism i have a lot of reservation about the way in which diplomacy can exceed just how far it can go. So, im more reserved in that respect, but i look at some of the false negotiator stories, but there are some. One is back in the famous case where an american basically send the gun man to do the work and event positioned himself as a kind of intermediary that could step in and be helpful. And there was an absolute classic by one of the last cases i find of th that the deliberate export in the International Terrorism about 2,000 there was a crisis taking multiple hostages. So of the philippines this group acts and then gadhaffi steps in as a mediator and he offers a fantastic amount of honey, 20 million is what i is recognid by the filipino diplomat, and this is to sort of steal the waters and solve the crisis and Everything Else and it was marvelous because he helped them before and hes now giving them 20 million, but also it emerges as the classic diplomat he was seeking in 2,000. It was highly skilled old stuff, so there is a lot to be weary about and diplomacy of course, and there i theres not always y pay off. A lot of groups went for decades with many attempts at intervention which failed and they had to be simply crashed. Economics is an important tool you know and we know everybody and every College Graduate knows if you are going to do economic sanctions is important to have the any people in the mix as you can and also to hold the van with some patients because the sanctions take a long time to work but sometimes they do work. I will let you if you think about it, most of you will think that sanctions had a role in the resolution of south africa with its apartheid regime. Certainly my studies made me believe that libyan behavior was changed by sanction. It was changed some in the 1990s, and was dramatically changed in about 2,003 end of 2004. Some of the people are right here in the towns who did this. And it is an ant ambassador Robert Joseph work with the United Kingdom to press the libyan authorities to get them to divest themselves of the un d. , not only the supplies that the actual sheen very this is kind of a prelude to what you are seeing. For making the dublin m. D. Was put on a ship and brought to the United States. It was a wonderful resolution. It was a very longstanding problem in the regime and that was facilitated by intelligence and diplomat from the two Different Countries and it is an extremely good story. Well, i didnt go into the questions of the strategy. So i need to mention a few of these. Mr. Bush then writes the First National terrorism strategy that we have and he did two of them and the principles were defeated the terrorists and their organizations into the d. My sanctuary and diminish the underlying conditions that terrorists exploit antispam that u. S. At home as the government a superb job on that. He got himself a very broad congressional authorization, which is now im sorry to say being prematurely questioned. He argues in his strategy that terrorists are truly evil an and hes not afraid to say so in fact he says that they are enemies of humanity to determine International Law that sort of prepares them to pirate the people that do genocide and they went to david cho called this articulation where i though links between the groups are broken up if need be and i suppose a setting that would require the clear i certainly dont have. The Obama Administration enters the fight and surprises many of us with remarkable continuity in some of the actual practices. They suggested it was good to be pretty different, but in fact more similarities than differences appear. Certainly his strategy published in 2011 has less martial language. Certainly there is less of a convention that this is a war. He calls for allies which is prudent and he does say hes going to try to get at the roots of journalism, something that is exceedingly hard to do. I wonder how jim phillips with a sense of getting it to terrorism in the middle east. I wonder how anybody with whatever level of expertise could imagine solving those problems rather than just dealing with them but he tries to get at the roots and they thought we can do this best if we advance democracy because advancing the democracy is a great provocative against terrorism and that is a proposition, which is by and large true i think that also has difficulties because we have seen many open societies which have wonderfully open political orders which are ravaged by terrorism so that is not the full answer but it may well be part of the full answer. There is a bit of a paradox. Im not sure that mr. Bush or mr. Obama can tell us how to deal with the roots of terrorism, but i suppose that we all want to try. Mr. Obama said we need to do a lot more with allies and a little bit less than we go along on an approach on a marked rhetorical difference. I have no problem with that. Our International Efforts are exceedingly important and are at the heart of the counterterrorism. He says less about the evil of terrorism and more warnings to us about our own practices. Have we crossed the line in places that are troubling and hes especially worried that the conduct of torture. He calls for a Legal Framework for the operations. Great idea. I dont know if we have seen us yet. I dont know if we have a Legal Framework that our citizens understand or even counterterrorism experts understand. I think that seems clear. So all this fuss about closing one timeout i would say its related to this failure to have an appropriate legal strategy. I could offer some comments, but the short of it is that when james and eric holder and others were talking about this in the old campaign it seems easy to criticize guantanamo but once in office, they found for a variety of reasons they actually find guantanamo quite useful for managing the problem of the detainees that we have for neither pure criminals nor people in uniform who we would treat through the military means. We could talk about that a bit if you like. The basic point i want to argue and i think the administration is a bit soft on the question of whether we are at war where we are seeing starting with the name 23rd speech at the National Defense university suggested that the war should end and we are withdrawing from the war and nobody of course once the more perpetual war and thats right. I think we are certainly at war. Its part of the executive branch and the military very much think they are at war. Some of the conundrum weve made for ourselves about 5010 event surveillance we can consider that we are in fact still in a state of the war with al qaeda central. Some of those problems get quite clear. We had a great deal of rights against this substate organization, which we can exercise in that respect. The last thing i want to see ifs there is of course a leader in the opposition. Its a strange thing that our president almost never mentions also hear he, but i think that he should. The document published by the white house in june of 2011 explicitly says in two places, not just one, that Osama Bin Laden is the only leader of al qaeda ever had, and since he had just been killed, that is an extremely important and interesting statement but its only about half true. Bin laden has added deputy from the very beginning in the 80s and all through the 90s this man alzawahiri of the atlantic published a bunch of stuff right off the hard drive from his camp in afghanistan you could see that he was functioning as the deputy and everyone assumed he would take over. Most people did when bin laden died, and he did so, and the oath of legions made by the subsidiary groups to alzawahiri. So he might not have all of the flash or the organizational abilities and he may even be less of a leader but he is a leader that is important and he has been for decades in terrorism and he in one of the leaders of al qaeda for decades, so i think its important to keep a fix on hand. In short, my assessment in the book is there are somethings that president is doing very well. His opportunities and his job difficulties are enormous and i think that he has done well to impose the sanctions on iran and i hope that we stick with those and not give them up and im glad hes identified the revolutionary guard. I am glad that he has pursued the war with its remarkable fusion of intelligence and defense assets and i approve of that and i think the president is very smart to keep pushing on that. There were other things that were perhaps not doing so well and the book exceeded modest recommendations. In short what we are looking at is a long war. Its not necessary to have a perpetual war and certainly until the leader is either caught or captured, then i suggest we are still in a state of war and we ought to be. Stephen . [applause] we have a few minutes for questions. Raise your hand if i will recognize you and folks will give you a microphone. Identify yourself briefly and then please ask a question. If i dont hear a question at the end of the second sentence i will ask you to stop is if you want to give a presentation here, see me afterwards and we will arrange. We have chris harmon for today. Its been a guy in a law student at american university. My question is in regards to this long war that you referred to. I would like to get your comment about what would you say to the people that have been moving the war for the last 13 years and as we continue down this path, we are never going to win. Even if you capture one or two people, the al qaeda that you formulated is appearing everywhere around the world. And i would like to get your comment specifically about moving the war. I dont think there is much evidence that we are losing the war. The way that i understand is that we talked about the longterm problem that al qaeda is having two centers of gravity. And if you know that phrase he actually does the analysis in the center of gravity and we were able to narrow it down to one that became the one central gravity is the core Operational Capability that he fled that alzawahiri is starting in a special jihad withal qaeda in 2001 before the attacks. And all of those third sort of operatives and personnel that very often have been caught and are in custody or are in guantanamo or in jail in afghanistan and support command for hundreds of those involved have been caught. Many of them are the most talented or they have the direct rules in planning operations. All of those people catching is a sort of victory. Moreover, the International Community is sort of alert and capturing some of those when they come for their trickery. And so, i think that part of it is impressive. The other side of it though as you suggest the raising of new terrorists, this isnt anything about the religion necessarily although that is central to their ideology. But if you look at the faces of the red brigades or the Irish Republican Army, there is always a process of regeneration. We need to somehow gets to bat on that account. I think that we are doing very badly. I dont know that we are losing that we are not making headway. And what bothers me is that people like kelly right here have been talking about Public Diplomacy for years but we are actually not showing the kind of new arguments and imagination and determination that we would need to make that succeed. And i dont think that this administration is going to do any better than the last one did on the side of the Public Diplomacy. This gentle man and then we will get you next. The commentary. In your strategy area you talk about we dont seem to mention some of the programs like the training of other countries and the covering of terrorism capabilities or the mentioning of the budget cut in the Bush Administration and what do you see in these programs and why its hard to get the funding levels sustained in the congress . You were careful to say that you havent seen that i thin itk on the close reading you will see it and you will be happy to know there is a section in what we can do on the strategy that says Something Like our partners can catch terrorists too because i think that youre right and i know how you spend your career in the state and the arresting thing is when we look at the jordan force the agency and the Defense Agency we look at so many parts of our operating forces or military forces and many of them are involved in these liaisons abroad which are not understood by the public. So for example the five academies around the world are in Law Enforcement training academies and will get a wonderful joint company shen of the fellow from the bureau into the fellow from the dea and the treasury that is an expert on the terrorist finance and someone in the special forces and maybe some International Perspectives into the places like bangkok via things run all the time. There are five of these and these are very unfortunate because they say that it would with bricks and mortar and a long procession of speakers, they say year after year our allies count our partners count. We are working this internationally and creating a network just like the terrorists have in the International Network themselves. So, you know, my last job in europe was a program thats now has 1400 graduates from all over the world, all professionals in counterterrorism. As of the u. S. And in that case the germans into the u. S. Make tremendous respects and i am very optimistic about the yielding on some of this. I am with the executive intelligence review. This is a twopart question getting at what you said about the roots of triggers on coming into the overarching question is what is your view on following the money . For example, the representatives walter jones from North Carolina and Stephen Lynch of massachusetts cosponsored a House Resolution to declassify the 28 pages of the 9 11 commission report, which in that review of the pages, they said reviewed the four in financing for the 9 11 attacks and the planes to saudi arabia. The second part of the question is your view of auditing certain banks for example hsbc and other banks known to take part in the financing of the terrorist groupterrorist groups inviolatig and also in violation of antiterrorism. The case was the most recent study done by carl levin in the senate. So what is your view on following the money fax i completely agree with the current federal effort to try to get at the sources of the financing. That is hard to do. I never say anything like money is the lifeblood of terrorism or that with cutting off the money supply we can strangle terrorism. I think that is a grows statement and politicians should never say that. Its like being elected to the job of the mayor of the city and to say im never going to end crime and if you come back in years you will want to reelect me. We wouldnt want to be deleted or should we. Terrorism is important and its one of the things you have to have some money but it doesnt take much to have been in the Westgate Mall attack in west kenya for example. Something like that can be quite cheap. So it can be an elaborate process or it can be a very quick simple ugly thing like one man with a couple of machetes outside of the British Army Base in one did a couple months back. Thats cheap terrorism summit is never going to be the essence but its part of a grand strategy. Sometimes the forensic value is fantastic. They bombed a bar to drive people out into the Public Square and that is where the major bomb was waiting and the damage looks like a left off that just hit the city. The way that was broken was true financial for in six. At some point some of the money came to an atm to disperse the money and they all went down there together looking into the picture waiting for their share so by simply finding on atm slip authorities were able to get right to the bottom of the case. Its never usually that easy but it was in that case, and theyve nicely documented. Shes here at the National Defense universit university soa lot of reasons why its worth it we should just never overblow the payoff it is just a part of our grand strategy and its upgrade work as easily as they did in breaking the case. As a sport believe the special forces officer i was greatly hard in the first time i went to one of the special Operations Command global synchronization conferences at the amount of focus they put on the terrorist financing aspects of it and how they could lead to other operations into stopping those things from going on. It is an enormous part of the national effort. So i would never discount how much of that we are doing paying attention they might not put it out the general public, but there is a lot of effort all the way across the u. S. Government and in conjunction with our allies. It is a major track of our counterterrorism effort. We can learn a lot looking at the way that he has addressed this problem. You talked about Public Diplomacy and the fact it seems we are not giving it so much. I wonder if you can give an example if there are any Public Diplomacy effort that are working in counterterrorism as well as some effort that we should be implementing. Yes. The opportunities are wide open and some of them we explored during the cold war. So a good congressman many of you would know exported the ideas in the ways of american democracy by doing, by supporting the International Broadcast and other work of the agency. I was in warsaw for the first time in my life and i was able to buy an old yellow copy of solidarity, which we ended funding to back in the crisis of the 80s and it was exciting to watch the way in which the funny organization came out of nowhere and had such an amazing effect and of course there was another case of having an amazing effect aneffectand that was as importae political side. These things can have an effect. People like andre and others will say that we are absolutely ignorant and blind to the good effect we are having and we dont realize the kind of thunder that is created over there in a world deprived of information but little we can provide that is greatly important. I think that we have mostly forgotten that ended his combat and weve not only broken down the United States information agency. We then try to build up some structure. So the new Public Diplomacy team seemed to have a pretty good budget. I think it is Something Like 800 million now which is about half of the total Public Diplomacy budget, 800 million for broadcasting in such perhaps. And we have a new television station that is aimed at the arabic speakers, for example based right here in springfield. We have another effort by the last secretary of state to get things going on the social media which is probably wise. But in fact, we have so far and elaborate attention to technology, to budget, to the media. And you know what the problem is . We dont want to say. We dont know what to say. We are embarrassed by the ideas that were the thrill of the founders and we are not really sure how to frame the arguments. We dont want to attack those that call themselves that because somehow we think we are going to use the wrong words and alienate muslim. We fail frequently to give airtime to amplify the speech into the argument of some very fine critics of the terrorists themselves that were on the inside. The egyptian that helped raise bin laden. Many of the people in the Foundation Like the defectors that are very valuable. Its folks like this weekend work with and we dont do that. We really have a poverty of imagination in the Public Diplomacy side. The gentle man in th gentlemd then we have one. Can you talk into the microphone, please . Do you think that they have gone away as a longterm problem . It is a good question of whether the groups and. Sometimes they seem to just change their name and i hope to for example the successful rendition of 1999 had quieted for the pkk, the Kurdish Workers Party and i was half wrong. We got five years of peace which i think was welcomed to others, but in fact they managed after the name change is the kind of work to sort of creep back with the Irish Republican Army weve seen an incredible breakthrough. When you have people like gerry adams taking the senior post he is actually in the southern republic when you advise others to get out of the fight you have had a ground changer and that is exciting but there are remnants. But i dont think thats the case will blow up again and with respect, and ive argued this a couple of years ago come of that organization is dieting and that is not a small thing. Its founded at the end of the 1950s. It has been an attempt to make the insurgency and its always have the political and terrorist dimensions, that there are people in spain and france and theyve published a rejection as it is not the way to go. The spanish have also compromised by the body encouraging the nationalism while opposing the terrorists with Law Enforcement and prescription of the political fronts and so youve got to actually have a Great Success story by a couple of democracies here with the irish and spanish. There are ways to do this. It doesnt balance towards military things. Its usually a touch in a single Law Enforcement and involves persistence and leadership in opinion on the higher ideals of the Democratic Politics and refusinDemocratic Politics andrr some em alternative to the Democratic Politics and the leaders in spain have done that and so there are some good success stories. We have a group watching on the live video this is from adam johnson. If all qaeda is inspired and we are still fighting, wouldnt we be in a religiously inspired more. Out by military means . Carried out by military is not military. Most states in the world have forces that a lot of ticker lists might wear parts in a uniform or do certain things that seem like they would wish to the state, but they dont make a simple cut defined by geneva so long ago the tests for whether you were a legitimate. I think it is true that the al qaeda were inspired by religion. Of course we make an obvious distinction between that which is islam and the extreme version which are at the heart of all qaeda. But its invaluable for us to face those religious roots of the problem, and in fact one of the best ways to do that is to open in addition to the inspired magazine said thereve been ten or 11 of these so far even a dirty editors were killed and the drug strik strike and drugst issues and that leaves out in terms how they do their diplomacy and how they hold onto their religious beliefs and how they are willing to fight and die for them and so they are religiously and fired. Our war is not. We have to remember we fought with the anarchists a century ago and we defeated them by a long process of Law Enforcement and other. We have resisted for years those that have very different motivations and there have been waves they are still with us but theyve never been able to effect the purposes. We attacked the communists in this country to the groups like the liberation army. In the 80s the fbi and others infiltrated the militia and they locked them up in jail and they did it with great skill so in many ways we have beat terrorism that has nothing to do with religion so it isnt that we have some kind of obsession with religion in this war is that we have an obsession with al qaeda that is in a hostil the hospitae that has attacked us repeatedly. I have a question regarding Public Diplomacy in europe, asia and the middle east he put an ideology focusing on the radicalization and the de radicalization of grams. Would you say that in a toolkit that the u. S. Has right now those are areas to further explore or that we are doing quite well . Think you. I dont think we are doing it well. The dutch are way ahead of us. We have tried in this way. The Marshall Center has held many meetings and brought people together to decide how to do it better. I think its difficult to change peoples ideas and i think that you have to have people that have to have the right argumen arguments. There is nothing quite as powerful as a member of one of those organizations that has quite. In the past we could take an example whether it was in the philippines if turned the century or the surrender in the 1950s. In both cases, the commander of the opposition gave a lecture to her and such and the prospect about the philippines being a partner in the americas without being subservient. It was incredible Public Diplomacy and they have a kind of credibility that no professor from the university can have. I think that is a good example of how we can do far better. In terms of the de radicalization, again some success is with some other countries but also some losses. Recidivism is a problem in prison and its a problem in terrorism, too so you are never certain that you have changed the views. There are some good cases and the saudis worked hard on this because they are stunned by the fact many of the dollars came from the various money thats usually private in saudi arabia. They want to fight back and they also cost hi goffstown by the as like saudi hezbollah and such a, but the terrorist groups or trying to overcome a personal direct threat, too so this can be part of a grander strategy and it is one of the many areas that we have much to learn from our partners. They are sometimes ahead of us and there is more we can learn about that. Im going to ask the last question and the night with you answer it and take it where ever you want to do your wrapped up anwrapup andthen we will conclum going to steal this from your introduction. Americans are very performance oriented. We like to finish this and be done, walk away and move on to the next events. Will we ever be able to say that we have defeated terrorism . I dont think so. The method and the idea that is introduced in the International Politics including in the anarchists period that is useful to study because of the certain similarities with internationalism and such and from 1980 to 1900 are not lost as we think about it but i dont think that especially since 1968 likely to say we wont see terrorism. It works often tactically and operationally and sometimes it even works strategically. We know the liberation front in algeria is a nationalist organization that in some ways a legitimate one and weve also know they are practitioners of ticker was him in the worst way introducing the bombings into Public Places in such. But theres a lot of other groups that have one, too. So this is a pressing threat strategically about the lower levels it seems that there is often going to be people that have seen some of those models and wants to do that. You know, and they think it works and in many respects it has worked. So we have to continue to push back in a moderate and professional way and wellinformed by the art and science and backed up by willpower because after all it is in many respects a test of our will. I think that all of you have realized in the coming to this s is an issue that hasnt gone away. Mr. Obama was correct when he said we cannot be at war forever. We have to end of this. I wish that is the way the world worked with mr. President , im sorry. Both sides have t had to stop ad unfortunately, as chris has discussed the other side hasnt decided to stop yet so that means we need to stay involved as well. I would ask you to join me in thanking chris for a good presentation. He is going to stay up here for a little while to sign books, so anyone that has purchased one outside can bring it up and he would be happy to eye it. Thank you for being at the heritage with us. [inaudible conversations]