Need in that context if the world believes we were not serious about negotiations. So i take this very seriously. I dont question the good faith of some folks who think this might be helpful. But it is my team that is at the table. We are deep in this stuff day in and day out. We dont make judgments blindly. We have been working on this for 5, 6, 7 years. We consult closely with allies like the United Kingdom and in making those assessments. Im asking congress to hold off because our negotiators, our partners, those who are are most intimately involved in this, assess that it will jeopardize the possibility of providing a diplomatic solution to one of the most difficult and long lasting National Security problems that we have faced in a very long time. And Congress Needs to show patience. So, with respect to the veto, i said to my Democratic Caucus colleagues yesterday that i will veto a bill that comes to my desk. And i will make this argument to the American People as to why i am doing so. I respectfully request them to hold off for a few months to see if we have the possibility of solving a big problem without resorting potentially to war. And i think that is worth doing. We will see how persuasive i am. But if i am not persuading congress, i will be taking my case to the American People on this. The big picture is very clear. The sanctions that america and the European Union put in place have had an effect. That has led to pressure. That pressure has led to talks. Those talks have a prospect of success. I would argue with the president , how much better is that than the other potential outcomes . That is what we should be focusing on. I have contacted a couple of senators this morning. I may speak to one or two more this afternoon. Not in any way as british Prime Minister to tell americans what they should or should not do but simply to make the point as a country that stands alongside america in these vital negotiations, that is the opinion of the United Kingdom that further sanctions or further threat of sanctions at this point wont actually help to bring the talks to a successful conclusion, and they could fracture the International Unity there has been, which has been so valuable in presenting a united front to iran. And i say this as someone who played quite a strong role in getting europe to sign up to the very tough sanctions. Including oil sanctions. I would make the point that those sanctions have had an effect. To those who said if you do an interim deal, if you discuss anything with them, the sanctions will fall apart. The pressure will dissipate. No one will be able to stick at it. That has been shown not to be true. The pressure is still there. As the president says, if the iranians say no and there is no deal, lets sit down and work out whatever sanctions to put in place. Because we are absolutely united in a simple thought which is a deal that takes iran away from a Nuclear Weapon is better than either iran having a Nuclear Weapon or military action to prevent it. It comes down to that simple choice. I do it i can as part of one of the countries negotiating. I think the way the president put it, i would not disagree with. Its very hard to know what the iranian thinking is about this. Im the first british minister in 35 years to meet with and and iranian president. There is a very clear offer there, which is to take iran away from a Nuclear Weapon and to conclude an agreement with them which would be mutually beneficial. That is what should happen. I think we have a question from Nick Robinson of the bbc. A Prime Minister with extra security being put in place today for the Jewish Community and also police officers. Would people be right to conclude that the threats of an attack on the streets of britain is almost imminent . Mr. President , you have spoken of the threat posed by fighters coming back from syria. Do you ever worry that this is a legacy of the decision of the United States and the United Kingdom to stand on the sidelines during syrias civil war . If i may briefly on the economy, you say you agree is it time to stick to the plan . We do face a very serious islamist extremist threat in europe, america, across the world. We have to be incredibly vigilant in terms of that threat. Weve got to strengthen police and security. Weve got to do everything we can to keep our country safe. That involves longterm, patient, disciplined approach. There is no single simple thing that needs to be done. It means closing down the ungoverned spaces that terrorists operate in. It means working against isil in iraq and syria, countering this poisonous, fanatical death cult of a narrative that is perverting the religion of islam. It means working together with our oldest and best partners so that we share intelligence and security and try to prevent terrorist atrocities from taking place. It means all of these things. And it is going to be a long patient, and hard struggle. Im convinced we will overcome it. Because in the end, the values we hold to our freedom of democracy, of having open and tolerant societies. These are the strongest values there can be. And in the end we will come through. Like some of the challenges our countries have faced together in the past, it will take great discipline and patience and hard work. You ask a question about immanence. We have a system in the United Kingdom where levels are set by the joint terrorism assessment center, not by politicians. They judge the threat we faced is severe. That means in their words, an attack is highly likely. If ever there is an imminent threat of attack, it goes to the next level up, which is critical, but it is their decision, not mine. It is my responsibility is to make sure we marshal everything we have as a country to defeat the threat. On the jewish communities, it is good that they metro police have announced they will step up patrols. I met with the Jewish Leadership Council earlier this week. We already provide through their Security Organization the Community Security trust to help protect jewish schools. But i think you have to recognize infighting terrorism you cannot simply rely on , policing security. This is a job for everyone. This is a role we will all have to play in the vigilance and in making sure that we keep our communities safe. With respect to syria and the connection to foreign fighters there is no doubt that in the chaos, in the vacuum created in big chunks of syria, the that is given an opportunity for foreign fighters to both come in and come back out. I chaired a u. N. Security council meeting, and we are now busy working with our partners to implement a series of actions, to identify who may be traveling to syria in order to get trained to fight for, to hatch plots that would be activated upon return to their home countries. So it is a serious problem. The notion that this is occurring because the u. S. Or Great Britain or other countries stood on the sidelines is it , first of all, mischaracterizes our position. We havent been standing on the sidelines. It is true we did not invade syria. The assertion is had we invaded , syria, we would be less prone to terrorist attacks. I will leave it to you to play out that scenario and whether that sounds accurate. We have been very active in trying to resolve a tragic situation in syria. Diplomatically, to humanitarian efforts, through the removal of chemical weapons from syria that had been so deadly. And now, as isil has moved forward we have been very active in degrading their capabilities inside of syria even as we are working with partners to make sure the foreign fighters situation is resolved. But i think davids point is the key one. This phenomenon of violent extremism the ideology, the networks, the capacity to recruit young people this has metastasized, and it is widespread, and it has penetrated communities around the world. I do not consider it an existential threat. This is one we can solve. We are stronger, we are representing values that the vast majority of muslims believe in in tolerance and working together to build rather than destroy. And so this is a problem that causes great heartache and tragedy and destruction. But it is one that ultimately we are going to defeat. But we cant just defeat it through weapons. One of the things we spoke about is, how do we lift up those voices that represent the vast majority of the muslim world so that counter narrative against this nihilism is put out there as aggressively and nimbly as the messages coming out from these fanatics. How do we make sure we are working with local communities and faith leaders and families whether in a neighborhood in london or a neighborhood in detroit, michigan so that we are inoculating ourselves against this kind of ideology . That is going to be slow plodding, systematic work. But its work that im confident we are going to be able to accomplish, particularly when we have strong partners like the United Kingdom. [inaudible] on the economy, i would note that Great Britain and the United States are two economies that are standing out at a time when a lot of other countries are having problems. So we must be doing something right. Major garrett. Thank you, mr. President. Good afternoon. Questions for both of you. I want to make sure we heard what you were trying to say, clearly directing a message to congress in the context of iranian negotiations. You are also sending a message to iran that if sanctions talks fail, thats more putting is the that warputting is the next most likely alternative. At atrocities in paris, raids in belgium. Do you believe europe is at a turning point now in its recognition of what its threats are at its own mobilization in terms of new laws, security footing, larger budgets . We both talked about cyber security. That is a crucial issue for both countries. Backdoors and encryption to protect people, and also privacy. I would like your comments on that. Thank you. I am not suggesting that we are immediate war putting should negotiations fail. But as david put it simply, if in fact our view is we have to prevent iran from getting a Nuclear Weapon, then we have to recognize the possibility that should diplomacy fail, we have to look at other options to achieve that goal. And if you listen sometimes to the rhetoric surrounding this issue, i think there is sometimes the view that this regime cannot be trusted, that effectively, negotiations with iran are pointless, and since these claims are being made by individuals who see iran as a mortal threat and want as badly as we do to prevent them from getting Nuclear Weapons, the question becomes what other alternatives exactly are available. That is part of what we have to consider as to why it is so important for us to pursue every possible avenue to see if we can get a deal. It has got to be a good deal not a bad deal. I have already shown myself willing to walk away from a bad deal. And the p5 1 walked away with us. And so, nobody is interested in some document that undermines our sanctions and gives iran the possibility of, whether covertly or gradually, building up its Nuclear Weapons capacity. We are not going to allow that and anything that we do, any deal that we arrive at if we arrive at one would be subject to scrutiny across the board. Not just by members of congress, but more importantly, by people who actually know how the technical aspects of Nuclear Programs can advance. And how we can effectively verify, in the most rigorous way possible, that the terms of the deal are being met. The bottom line is this. We may not get there, but we have a chance to resolve the Nuclear Issue peacefully. I should point out that even if we get a nuclear deal and we are assured that iran doesnt possess Nuclear Weapons we still have a whole bunch of problems with iran on statesponsored terrorisms their rhetoric towards israel, their financing of hezbollah, we have differences with respect to syria its not as if suddenly we have a great relationship with iran. It solves one particular problem that is urgent, and it solves it better than the other alternatives that might present themselves. So my main message to congress at this point is just hold your fire. Nobody around the world doubts my ability to get additional sanctions passed should these negotiations fail. Thats not a hard vote for me to get through congress. So the notion that we need to have additional sanctions or even the possibility of sanctions hanging over their head to force them to a better deal i think the iranians know that that is certainly in our back pocket if negotiations fail. With respect to violent extremism, my impression is that europe has consistently taken this seriously during the course of my presidency. We have worked collaboratively and with great urgency, and the recognition that not only do you have foreigners who may be trying to hatch plots in europe, but that, given large immigrant populations, its important to reach out to and work with local communities, and to have a very effective intelligence and counterterrorism cooperation between countries and between the u. S. And europe. Theres no doubt that the most recent events has amplified those concerns. I think one of the things i have learned over the last six years is that theres always more that we can do. We can always do better. We learn from mistakes. Each incident that occurs, teaches our professionals how we might be able to prevent these the next time. And im confident that the very strong cooperation that already exists with europe will get that much better in the months and years to come. [inaudible] here is where i actually think europe has some particular challenges. I said this to david. The United States has one big advantage in this whole process. It is not that our Law Enforcement or our Intelligence Services are so much better, although ours are very, very good, and i think europeans would recognize we have capabilities others dont have. Our biggest advantage is that our muslim populations feel themselves to be americans. There is this incredible process of immigration and assimilation that is part of our tradition that is probably our greatest strength. It doesnt mean we arent subject to the kinds of tragedies we saw at the boston marathon. But that has been helpful. There are parts of europe in which that is not the case. That is probably the greatest danger that europe faces, which is why as they respond, as they work with us to respond to these circumstances, its important for europe not to simply respond with a hammer and Law Enforcement and military approaches to these problems but there also has to be a recognition that the stronger the ties of a frenchman of north african descent to french values, the french republic, a sense of opportunity, that will be as important, if not more important in overtime solving this problem. I think theres a recognition of that across europe. Its important we dont lose that. The last point i will make, with respect to the issue of intelligence gathering, signal intelligence encryptions, this is a challenge that we have been working on since i have been president. Obviously, it was amplified when mr. Snowden did what he did. It has gone off the pages the front pages of the news, but we havent stopped working on it. We have been in dialogue with companies and have systematically worked through ways in which we can meet legitimate privacy concerns, but also meet the very real concerns that david wright identified and my fbi director identified. Social media and the internet is the primary way in which these terrorist organizations are communicating. That is no different than anybody else, but they are good at it. When we have the ability to track that in a way that is legal and forms with due conforms with due process rule of law, and presents oversight, that is a capability that we have to preserve. The biggest damage that was done as a consequence of the snowden disclosures was in some cases a complete undermining of trust. Some would say that was justified. I would argue that although there are some legitimate concerns there, overall the United States government and from what i have seen, the british government, have operated in a scrupulous and lawful way to try to balance the security and privacy concerns. And we can do better. That is what we are doing. But we are still going to have to find ways to make sure that if an al qaeda affiliate is operating in Great Britain or the United States, that we can try to prevent real tragedy. And i think the Companies Want to see that as well. They are patriots. They have families they want to see protected. We just have to work through in what in many cases are technical issues. There is not so much difference in intent. But how to square the circle on these issues is difficult. And we are working with partners like Great Britain and the United Kingdom, but we are also going to be in dialogue with companies to try to make that work. On the iranian issue, i think at this point, i dont think you can characterize it if there is a deal, new pressure has to be applied to iran. Even if there is a deal, a key to that deal will be transparency and making sure this country isnt developing a Nuclear Weapon. That would mean repeated pressure, even after a deal was done. I would absolutely back up what barack says about recognizing that in so many other ways, we have some major disagreements with what t