Story. [ ] 29 months ago i sat at the inside story anchor desk for the first time and welcomed viewers to what we hoped would be a useful tool for picking the lock on understanding the day news. After decades in the News Business i was impatient with pat answers, conventional narratives and worried about how well you the audience were being served. So many words, security, justice, freedom, fairness, protection. Were being used by powerful people as if we all agreed on what they mean. I wanted this program to be a place you could come to get a more thorough, less pat set of answers to your questions about what was going in the world. We didnt always succeed, but we did often enough that i think we lived up to many of the goals the staff had set for itself, asking questions noone else was asking, covering stories ignored but a rump through the top headlines of the day. Leaving the audience able to walk away from the television with a better handle on the events shaping the world for better and often for worse. Over the past three years we have witnessed the rise of a reducedless network of heavily armed informatively financed rebels in iraq and syria, the Islamic State group, twisting the teaches of islam to death and destruction, with a goal to turning the region into an islamic caliphate. I spoke a terrorism expert about the best way to combat the group did we underestimate how hard it was going to be to build an Opposition Army in the ground, on the ground in that part of the world . I think we potentially did underestimate it, but i think we also have several examples to draw from because really what you outlined in your opening is this is a network. How do you attack a network . Its not just on the ground in syria or in northern iraq. It is a systemic approach. Just as you have to turn the tide for recruiting for young european men an women or western men and women, whether it is from canada or the u. S. , that want to join the fight, it is not as simple as dropping a bomb in syria or suffocating the resources and finances. It has to be a multilayered, multipronged approach. In order to stop the growth, one, of i. S. I. S. And also to combat it in ways that are beyond just on site in raqqa, in aleppo, in syria, in northern iraq. That has got to be part of the strategy. I know thats part of it, but im not sure how well it is working we talked the day after the president rolled out that policy. You were sceptical then. Have your fears been realized . I think they have. He said that were doing with a multipronged and fast edit adverseary. We need to have a military pronged strategy for dealing with that. What is important to keep in mind here is that were dealing with one that operates from the asynmetrical. Where they operate like a military force in places where theyre operating like a terrorist organization. Every single gradation between theyre adapting what they do and how they do it to the resources they have and the environment they find themselves in. The approach that weve had is to wage conventional war on what we assumed would be a fixed target and not assume that they would respond. What theyve done in paris is respond to us with the tools at their disposal in that environment. We need to understand that theres a spectrum of threats that come from i. S. I. L. And respond to that each in kind. With the difficulty with the Current Administration approach is it has been a focus on containment and not of all the other grades how do you turn back the young men who are willing to join up to, to train, to fight and to die . Prevention is better than cure, of course, but youre not going to save everyone. We need to be very realistic about that. Our expectations have to be realistic. On the prevention side it really has to come down to the muslim communities, bottomup approach, not a topdown state centric, statedirected approach. Counselling programs and really jurists, muslim jurists, to explain to people. The foreman this group is that is referred to by the prophet as the dogs of hell, the pro, genator of the armies of the anti christ. These people are hearing the language of heroism, we need to show them that its not heroism but terrorism stories emerged of increasingly gruesome violence. People poured out of the region into neighboring countries and then in a makeshift flotilla heading across the Eastern Mediterranean to southern europe. Hundreds of thousands continued to flee their homes in search of asylum. I spoke with a head of the u. S. Committee for refugees and immigrants about their desperate journeys. Joining us to talk about it, a Senior Vice President for Global Engagement committee. He directed the off of Refugee Resettlement understand president obama. If youre in trouble somewhere in the world and you want to come to the United States, compared to other places is it easy or hard to get into this country . Its quite difficult to come to this country. There is few ways of coming to this country through a process. Sometimes it would take up to two years, sometimes it may take up to 10 years. The process is not easy. If you have 60 million refugees and if you bring in 10,000 or 70,000, thats a drop in the sea. The process is not easy. It requires a lot of security clearance, a lot of preparation. Its not a very easy process were known around the world in having large numbers of immigrants. How is it different if youre a refugee . The refugees are mostly from a refugee camp. Immigrants are coming for employment or they have family here. The process is quite different. Refugees are going through a completely different process and than immigrants. Since 1975 we have resettled over 3 million refugees. In 1980 we managed to resettle over 200,000 refugees from Southeast Asia after the war in vietnam. So we have a long history of providing Refugee Resettlement in this country even though our country is part of the refugee history a lot of people who helped the United States on the ground in Southeast Asia did eventually come here, but if we were to compare the number of people who have been able to come legally from afghanistan and iraq, where United States forces were fighting for years, is that a large number . Im not sure whether its a large number, but i think the good thing is that at least you any iraqi working with the u. S. Government is going through a process to come here. I think we managed to bring in quite a large number of iraqis or afghanis. We came up with a separate visa for them there have been complaints that the process is very slow. Its dangerous when theyre back in afghanistan and considered collaborators i agree with you. We have been asking the administration to expedite the process. Some of these folks are working for the u. S. Government. So we have a much better understanding of who they are, but, again, i think being a post the 11, the security proceed 9 11, the security process makes quick to have a deployment of staff and then processing refugees immediately after that this is a story that you understand not only from the point of view of a government official, but you lived this, didnt you . Absolutely. I was a refugee myself in the 1980s. I came to this country in 1982, but 1982 to 2001 is a completely different process. We have a long history of refuge refugees. Since 1980 we managed to bring in three million refugees from so many places, bosnia, iran, iraq and vietnam and other places. I think one of the things people dont understand is refugees are probably the most vetted people to come to this country, whether now or before during our two and a half year run inside story has devoted a lot of coverage to mass shootings, to the massacre in the black church to the attack on an Office Christmas party. A beg part of any effort to keep guns out what will be agreed to be the wrong hands will rest with gun dealers. I found begun dealers get talked about a lot and dont get enough chances to speak for themselves. We invited a panel of begun dealers to inside story to talk about their role on the front lines of the gun debate. Right now, as we discussed before, licensed gun dealers have to run background checks and facetoface sellers dont. Is that unfair . Does it create a burden on you that other sellers who are deriving a good living from selling guns dont have to work with . I want to know what other sellers are doing not licensed. I dont know a single one. At the gun shows i go to, i dont see people who are unlicenceed, who are in the business. I see some people liquidating a collection, their own collection, maybe somebody who says, i saw this at a gun show where it was cheap and i bought it and i sell it. I see that that person doesnt have to use much discretion on who they sell it too. They just want the makeup in their hands money in their hands that is true. That being said, ive noted the gun people are some of the most honest people ever. Seriously. If there was anything wrong with that other guy, theyre thot going to do it. Not going to do it. Most people do form a. M. Bill of sales formal bill of sales with somebody that they know. I collect old russian guns. Well, i know somebody who will buy this. There are few people out there who are not licenceed and in the business. That is already illegal. If youre in the business and youre doing this as a livelihood, it is on the books you need to get a licence. Its already there thats a big part of what the president talked about, who is a gun dealer for the purposes law and statute. They talked about deriving of the principle motive being property which i think a lot of people selling gun is their motivation, isnt it . Yes. Owe would say so. At least for people who are doing it for that purpose. Like you were saying, you have a lot of times people will be liquidating a collection. You see older gentlemen who have collected guns and theyre now in their 70s and 80s, so they will get a table at the show and sell their personal guns. Theyre not trying to derive a profit. Theyre trying to liquidate an estate essentially they also operate in a very different environment from you. They have less to lose than you do. Fewer rules to follow, dont they . They would still have to ensure that the individual is a resident of their state, has a valid ichl d. Often times a lot of those private valid id. Oftentimes a lot of those will have a permit, but theyre not required to do the background check like we are. Thats a true statement the background checks are not always accurate. They dont kick out the right people, they sometimes deliver false positives. Do you know why someone is being rejected if someone comes back from the background check process saying, no, dont sell this guy a gun . Generally no. You go through the online system, it will pop back a proceed, delayed or deny. If its a delay, a lot of times we will go out people will say something. We can also look them up in a court case system and see why theyre not, but the feds or the knick system doesnt tell us why one thing the president talked about was going after people who knew they werent supposed to own guns but were trying to buy them this is a major issue. They dont for instance, in my state it must be your third or fourth felony for you to get time. If you get caught with a gun, probation. They dont go after people who do straw purchaseses which is how they end up in crime. Bad guy has a girlfriend, goes into a gun store clean and approvalable yes. Not from an old guy selling his collection. It is done through straw purchases. Then they dont prosecute people who do and who use guns in crime are there people who shouldnt have a gun and do you have a role in deciding who that is . Can people show up in your store and you size them up and you think i dont want to sell them a gun . Absolutely. There are people who shouldnt have firearms. We reserve the last right of refusal. We can choose not to sell that firearm regardless of is there an approval or not if they pass a background check it doesnt feel right to you, you can say youre not going to sell them a gun . Absolutely. We can stop the sale at any point in time. If we have any reason to suspect, we can stop that purchase if there were no background checks and more of this fell on the individual dealer, are you clear about who you wouldnt sell to or times or event where you just wouldnt sell . Ive done that before when . You get people all the time. Theres a lot of things. What is the cheapest gun youve got . What is the least amount of ammunition i can buy or a woman, one, two, three, four, five, i want that one. Why . I just want that one. Is this your first time . Theres a tonne of things. Also people who are slick who know what you want to hear. People who come into my shop which i found out later on, a couple i remember clearly. They say the right things. They went home and unfortunately they shot themselves. It happens. They know how to say the right thing. Its up to us, obviously, screening people, to know this person is clearly out of their mind, something is wrong with them, Something Like that. I dont even go through the background check process. If theres something wrong with them, they dont even fill out the forms. Its up to us. Were the first line of defense and after that, even with somebody saying the right things, hopefully they get caught in the nik system does this lift the burden for you, having the background system . People find it intrusive and a pain in the neck and other places, but does it, as that first line that andy was talking about, in effect, keep it clean . Keep it on the level that you submit this to another authority . It doesnt relieve me of any burden. It reassures me that im not selling to a felon or on otherwise prohibited individual. We all look good in daylight, but that is what the system is for so we dont sell to a known criminal theres no blow back if you dont sell to somebody . They cant come back and say you have to sell me, can they . They cant force it. Once again, we can always be held civilly liable. If somebody feels were discriminating against them based on race or something, they could try and sue us for that, but the law gives us the its actually in the law that we can deny a sale to anybody that we dont feel should be buying a gun do you do that often . As often as necessary. Absolutely life and death decisions, understanding americas hostage negotiating policy. We will hear from an american who was kidnapped in iraq and eventually rescued by special forces, plus disorder in the Supreme Court. Stay with us. Its inside story. Brick by brick, i will open it. It will take more than a few rocks to stop me from doin what i have to do. Suddenly heroin seems to be everywhere. Theres no way i am willing to give up my family for a drug ever again. Getting to the heart of the matter. Proud to tell your stories. Al jazeera america. Welcome back to inside story. Kidnappings have become a place of civil war in places like iraq, afghanistan. They use it as a sideline to fund their operations. Weve seen some high profile abductions among americans, europeans, aid workers snatched to help the people who hold them for ransom. I spoke with a senator about the rules governing hostage negotiations and to a man who was himself once a hostage in iraq. Joining he is the senator. Welcome to the program. Do you support a reformulation of the administrations policy toward dealing with the kidnappers of americans overseas . First, as you know, a man was recently killed who was a hostage. It was a tragic circumstance and i had a chance to visit with the family on several occasions. So i think first and foremost that the u. S. Has to have all its Resources Available to try to rescue those who are caught in these horrible circumstances. It has got to be a high priority. They have to have coordinated efforts among the different agencies that are involved and they have to have direct contact with the family. We have to understand also that negotiating with terrorists can be counter productive. We under that. We have a policy well understood in america about negotiating with terrorists. On the other hand we know there will be efforts made by family and we have to be mindful of those efforts and make sure that we dont interfere with the legitimate efforts made by families of individuals who are found in these circumstances so just over ten months in, there is a raid on the compound where youre being held, stunning video of the actual rescue. Did you even realise what was happening when it first went down . Not at first because that morning i had woken up and i heard some helicopters around lunchtime and it wasnt unusual to hear helicopters because i could hear them flying over from time to time, but on this day it sounded like they were landing on the house which i was held in. I heard running and yelling and i didnt know exactly what was going on until the soldier jumped down in the little underground room i was in and appointed at me and said are you roy . Our news cast did the valuable and important job of telling you what was happening right now. On this program we took the assignment of fleshing out the implications of events, of playing them forward, explaining the consequences. Just a few short weeks ago the Supreme Courts most conservative justice died unexpectedly at a Hunting Lodge in texas. The fight to replace Justice Scalia took shape almost immediately. I spoke with an author and attorney and the naacp about what the vacancy means for the cases on the docket right now. Gentlemen, i dont mean to suggest for a second that the situation is onpress dented, that weve never had eight members before, but it is the peculiar situation where everyone is understood to be wearing blue shirts or red shirts under their black robes im not sure that this is the first time youve had a divided court, five to four decisions predominating. That is true for many years since the chief justice was appointed in 1969. I think there is not necessarily going to be disorder. A large percentage of the courts decisions are unanimous. The difficult ones are off times five to four, about but in this instance, if its so difficult the court could carry over, reargue the case. They orderly end in june. They take three months recess. It would slow things down a little bit and maybe in the interim they only grant certiorari on the cases where they dont need four to four. That means the Lower Court Decision is disturbed and doesnt set a precedent when that happens, send it back down to the lower appellate level, does anybody get another bite of the apple because it wasnt de