Extension. If the president signed that . The im not sure that anybody knows what the outcome of the situation is going to be. We saw the speaker of the house going on television over the weekend to declare that he is certainly comfortable with not funding the department of Homeland Security. I am not sure what kind of an of general mlss leads to that conclusion. And im not sure that its in the best interest of the vote tabulation that i can see. But yet he said that its on the left. And i think that does raise some questions about whether or not this new governing public and majority in congress is committed to actually being responsible in acting at the best interest to get one of the things he said at the end of last year was one of his goals was to make sure that Republican Leadership didnt appear scary to the american people. He was setting the bar really low. It looks like right now they are prepared to wiggle underneath the bar. We are going to see what should emerge as a plan from the republicans to fund the department of Homeland Security before the deadline. If they dont get an agreement on funding from the department of Homeland Security and there is a partial shutdown of the department, will this be a National Security risk in other words will americans be less safe if congress cannot come up with an agreement on the department . The department has specific information about the impact that this would have on their operations. So i would refer you to them to talk about but let me say i dont think theres anybody that would be comfortable making the case is refusing to pay the men and women on the front line actually enhances the National Security. Obviously they looked at the information that stood out and they got a large number of essential employees that most of them will still be going to work so i am just trying to gauge how big a threat or is it a threat to the safety of the americans if this Funding Agreement isnt reached. I dont think anybody can stand here and make the case it would be good for the National Security. Is there a risk i would leave it to the department of Homeland Security to offer a specific assessment of the impact this would have. I dont think theres anybody that could make the case that it would be good or that it would be fair. The president gave a state of the union speech focused on middleclass economics and he talked about a wide range of things that we could do to strengthen the middle class in this country. The fact of the matter is for the Transportation Security Administration trying to safeguard the airports those are good middleclass jobs and American Patriot and im surprised we have Congressional Republicans suggesting they should go ahead and go to work to get a paycheck. Can you respond to what the speaker of the house said on this he makes the case that house passed the bill to fund the department of Homeland Security. If that bill is now before the senate and the Senate Democrats are filibustering the bill would you respond to that and encourage the democrats to drop the filibuster so that the bill can be passed and you can have negotiations to the oldfashioned way if it comes along . The house has passed a bill to fund the department of Homeland Security. Democrats are filibustering it. They dont support the legislation that would actually undo the kind of administrative reforms the president s budget has on the immigration system. If republicans want to have a negotiation about trying to fix the system we would welcome the opportunity to have that negotiation. We wanted to talk about the reform literally for years. We had good conversation with democrats and republicans in the United States senate and we got got it a partisan piece of legislation with Congressional Republicans blocked for more than a year and a half. As of again im not really sure what the speakers point is. I would assume he understands the responsibility that he has for making sure the department of Homeland Security is funded and we are hopeful he will get that done before the deadline. Another topic i want to ask about in the wall street journal that the president has received communications back from the ayatollah in iran one back in 2009 and another just in the past few weeks. Can you confirm that . Im going to decline to get into any of the specifics about the conversations the president may have had our communications the president may have had with the leaders of the regime. We have been very clear about the priorities and the top priority is concerned in the Nuclear Program but theres a long list of other concerns the United States has in the way that the regime has the support of terrorism around the globe and they continue to promote antisemitism and even to wish ill on our allies in israel so theres a long list of concerns we have with the regime but the conversations we are having right now about resolving the Community Concerns about the Nuclear Program are what we are focused on. We are also concerned about the status of a handful of americans that are currently being detained in iran wrongfully and against their will. And we are continuing to work for the release of those americans as well. Im sorry, go ahead. The president himself acknowledged in the past that he has written to ayatollah so im asking if you can confirm whether or not ayatollah has responded back. Can you at least confirm the president is in receipt of a letter or letters in response to what we know the president has returned. I cant do that but let me see if i can get more information. To followup on that follow up on that eventually i understand youre in the middle of negotiations. You want to keep the correspondent confidential but will you eventually release those letters obviously it is a great interest whether or not the leader of iran whether there has been a letter chain back and forth to the president will you commit to releasing those to the public . Im not willing to commit that those letters exist but let me give you more details on that. Angela. The violent extremism is going on right next door and the president went to Great Lengths to not say anything about the islamist extremists but if you look at the groups participating most of them are related in one way or another to the Muslim Community. How do you square that message with we are very mindful of the fact that the strain of extremist ideology has tried to insert itself in the Muslim Community. There is no question about that. Its true in the United States and other places around the world and that will be the subject of extensive discussions at a summit. At the same time we also recognize there are other forms of extremism that has prompted others to carry out active violins and we talked on a couple previous occasions about you know the violent extremists that carry out an attack on the temple in wisconsin for the radical ideology that prompted someone to go and opened fire outside a Jewish Community center in kansas. So extremism has taken a variety of forms in the country that have had violent results and we want to be focused on making sure we are countering all of that but that does not diminish in any way the concern that we have had some extremists have made inroads into some of the communities and attempting to inspire them to carry out acts of violence and join their fight. We have worked very hard and diligently with the Muslim Community in the country and with local Law Enforcement and political leaders to counter that ideology and that messaging. That is something that we remain vigilant and today the summit or this weeks summit provides a good venue talking about the success of that strategy and to identify the additional steps we can take to safeguard the american people. Are there any that are targeted at other groups . I would refer you to the National Security council to provide more information about other individuals participating in the summit. [inaudible] the International Corruption like airstrikes. What i can tell you is right now what we have said is we are supportive of the ongoing efforts of the un special representative in his efforts to try to facilitate the formation of the National Unity government and that we believe that is the next appropriate step that we are mindful of the fact there are extremists that are trying to establish or at least capitalize on the instability in the libya. We saw this brutal killing of the 21 egyptian christians in that country and that is something that we strongly condemn over the weekend and we are going to coordinate with the International Community to try to bring about some stability in libya and make that a much less hospitable place for the extremist groups to carry out acts of violence like this. Should be able to call airstrikes and they could be as effective as the strikes on isis. What we have said in general is the United States and the Coalition Partners are prepared to back up the efforts of the local fighters on the ground with airstrikes. Many have noted that track the track record of the local fighters in this syria and battle after battle they succeeded in defeating the rebels. We do not anticipate that with better training and better equipment that they would perform better and that is why there is this american led effort and im in close coordination with the region to train and equip the moderates eerie in opposition fighters. We also indicated we would expect with better Training Department and the backing of sophisticated military airstrikes that the performance on the battlefield would improve so we certainly would envision a time in which military air power would be used to back up the fighters on the ground. You may be asking a more specific for the way that those local Ground Forces would interact with the Coalition Military aircraft i would refer you to the department of defense are mapped to know how that communication would take place thats part of our strategy is predicated on the idea that military air power could be used to enhance the performance of the opposition fighters on the battlefield. You mentioned this a couple times to counter the violent extremism succeeded to address the legitimate grievances through the democratic process. When it comes to groups like isis what to grievances do you think that they have in the democratic process . When we talk about isis leaders there is nothing that if you can use to justify their brutality but we have seen them carry out. This is an ideology that is totally bankrupt and is impossible to justify. Thats why you havent just seen a strong reaction from the United States, youve seen a strong reaction from more than 60 countries around the world joined the United States to take the fight to ultimately destroy them. Of the legitimate grievances of isis or any other extremist group. I dont have it in front of me but that is a reference to the efforts of the administration and local Law Enforcement and other Community Leaders here in this country to prevent isis from succeeding in recruiting and inspiring people to join their fight. One part of the strategy is trying to remove the grievances that individuals may have and thats part of why so much of the outreach that we are doing in the communities across this country is and just threw all enforcement but Community Leaders that have an interest in trying to protect their youth to make sure they are aware of the kind of support and opportunities that exist in the communities. That governments do not claim violence is the only way to achieve a change and it will only succeed if the system can address legitimate grievances of the democratic process. Im just struggling to understand. Isis doesnt have any legitimate grievances. Are there any others that have legitimate grievances . The plaintiff that element is to make it clear that there is not just a movie but also a benefit to ensure that the countries that are carrying out the Counterterrorism Operations in the borders do so with a proper respect for universal human rights. A example of a country that i did not cite earlier in the places where they were working to try to Counter Terrorism and extremism is a nigeria. They offer to the government to aid in their efforts. They are mindful to remind the Nigerian Government that its important to respect the basic universal human rights even if they carry out the Counterterrorism Operations. They do not have a photo recruiting around that only is enhanced if you have a government that runs over the basic human rights and values of the citizens. The president put out a statement on sunday that was from you about the press secretary not a statement from the president. In a statement thats what i want to ask you as you pointed out you talked about the murder of 21 citizens and im curious why didnt you mention it was 21 christians killed by muslims . Is that relevant . The extremist that carried out the attack indicated that the reason they were killing wasnt just because they were egyptian but also because they were christian. And the president has been very clear, the president talked about this speech that he gave earlier this month. Theres a response ability of people of all faith to stand up and speak out when individuals try to use the space and distort to try to justify the act of violence. I try to be clear i can account for that statement but we have been clear in the oped was published today in on a variety of occasions it has been pretty clear we condemn the outrageous killing of these egyptian citizens because of the state. Nobody should ever be targeted because of who they are and what they look like and how they worship a. I think that as we indicated the situation in North Carolina is still under investigation. And our local Law Enforcement authorities are trying to determine exactly what the motivation of that individual that has been charged with this crime was. So thats still under investigation. But what is clear is that there is a principle that exists regardless of the faith of the individual in question that people shouldnt be targeted because of their religion and what they look like or what their last name is and how they worshiped. They were targeted . We dont know. Its a local investigation right now. In this case as he has with many others to articulate a pretty clear principle and i think that its the kind of principle that the vast majority of americans should be able to supporters is that people should not regardless of their faith be targeted because of their last name is, what they look like or how they worship. We dont know that they were targeted because of their last name or their faith. I think it is acknowledged in the statement as well. We also acknowledge this is an issue under investigation in North Carolina. As a principle, this is the kind of thing that we should all be able to agree with. Okay. What exactly is the take away that you anticipate . There is no executive or governmental action. It is a talking shop. What is the point . Im sorry ed. I mean bill. [laughter] i hope that as a compliment. I hope thats the way that you took it. The take away is this is an opportunity for us to make sure that people all across the country understand what kinds of effective strategies are being put in place in place of like los angeles and minneapolis and boston to try to safeguard communities all across the country. And as a there are effective strategies they use in those communities to counter the radical messaging and ideology that extremists can propagate on social media. And we want to make sure that communities all across the country are aware of the tools that are available to them. And i think that is a worthwhile exercise and i think it certainly is something that local leaders across the country would benefit on. But i would encourage you to do is before you pass judgment wait until someone concludes. Then follow those that participate see whether or not it is worthwhile. You mentioned mostly muslim but you wont see that even though that is the subject in the course today. I think that i i did i dated a answer to angeles question that we are particularly concerned about the success that some extremists have had of him having some dark corners of the muslim world to try to distort the tenets of the religion in the way that justifies the radical ideology and the violent acts and that is something that we strongly condemn and we devote a significant resources here in this country and in the local communities across the country to counter that messaging. There will certainly be an intense focus on the summit, but not the only one. I think that we have been very clear about what we call it and why we approach the challenge in this way. The Obama Administration plans to send the rest. Can i get your reaction . I think that over the last couple of years u