Police. Yes, theyre very different and long wolves have an actual proceeding to what theyre doing. They operate along and dont have an organization and dont have training. Im glad you mentioned mr. Muh muhammad from cincinnati, ohio because hes the only one thats come back to the United States thats alleged to plan an attack. Crucially, he was trained. We need to keep that in mind. It wasnt alshibab. It came from the community. I think in that particular case it wasnt in the documents. He went to an unspecified Training Camp while he was posting about the islamic state. In terms of the problems these are two different problems. We could see isis trying to bridge the two to coordinate loosely long wolf activity with terrorist type activity. In the case of the attorney, this may be a dry run to see what happens when you see somebody back. We have seen that isis has had return fighters who have been active in europe. Weve seen at least one case of what was described by investigators investigators. Theres not much reason to believe they wouldnt try this sort of thing. The long wolf piece of it is eds for them. Its relative to other groups. Its going to capture a lot of headlines for them with a lot of investment. The question is how much they want to invest in attacks here. Thats unclear right now. Could you talk about the coordination between dhs and the fbi and the nctc . Yeah, there is a dhs coordinator. David gurtson comes from a background and i was surprised to see dhs putting that kind of resource in the area. The office of civil rights and Civil Liberties is looking at how to avoid the securitization aspect of it. Its really poisonous to the cve branding. Community groups were giving a false narrative of what the government is trying to do. If i could quickly make a point on the long wolf, what kind of long wolves are we talks about . I call them isis zombies. These are the selfactivating might have Mental Health issues, low level of competencies and then you can have directed attackers who are syria returns who have a level of competence who one person can pull off a quiet effective attack. In pars, of course, only two guys did what they did. You could easily have a cell of six people, two three men teams to do simultaneous attacks and cause great disruption. Theyre again a number of threats in that spectrum. We need to do the best Practices Community by community. Local face was important. I said the community has been very involved and i think in a productive dialogue. The federal government where we have responsibility coordinating between the three agencies i mentioned and perhaps some other agencies that are more on the intelligent side. Is that working or should there be more accountability that comes from more definitive responsibility . It is working. Now that there is a coordinator and that is happening is a positive step. Its running into the issues of critics saying you know, these are just, this is just an excuse to intelligence gather. I think dhs and their particular mechanisms working on cve are trying to navigate the space as best as possible. Thanks senator portman. Well start another round. I started my Opening Statement with description of the posting with the claim that theres 71 trained fighters and 23 of you accepting assignments. Nobody knows whether thats blustered or real. Is that an unprecedented posting . Have we seen similar things like that . Similar threats that havent panned out anybody . I think we have multiple times times. Its pretty precedent. The volume of material they put out is just truly extensive and it comes in a lot of different formats. Theyve made a variety of threats with greater, more or less over time. One of the reasons was it was something they had actually specifically talked about that had turned into an attack and that was unusual because they create so much noise that that needle in the hay stack can be very difficult to detect. Its the attempted winning message. Yeah i think that you know certainly, they have dozens to low hundreds of supporters in this country and some of those people may be prepared to act and i dont think theres anything remotely as organized as what that described. Certainly in your testimony and in both written and oral, you were talking about the rise of the brand of isis but theyre also very vulnerable to the reversal of that. I hope thats true. I also understand strategically theyve made a lot of enemies and theyre being attacked on a number of different fronts. The state of the goal of this administration is defeat isis. Ive asked Administration Officials in the past what does defeat look like . Define it. I would like to have you gentleman take a crack at what does defeat look like to you and how achieveable is that . I think theres actually a very clear thing that defeat means in this context which isnt true of other groups. They have staked their legitimacy to the continuing viability and if the cal fit is no longer viable they could lose the legitimacy quickly. If youre able to make it no longer a viable entity and no longer received as a viable entity, that point they have lost. Their narrative would be completely dead. The arguments they have certain outs that for example they believe at some point there would be a grand battle and they would be crushed. Essentially, it means you make this already marginal movement much, much more marginal. Let me add one final thing. Sometimes we talk about what the community could do to delegitimize the message . For the United States, if we had a 5 Approval Rating we would think thats an awful thing. For isis, they can have a 5 Approval Rating and theyre dealing with it. Theyre not dealing with the whole movement. Theres many within the movement who argue against isis. The question is not how do we change an entire community but how do we stop this fringe group. Does anyone else have different definition of defeat . In cutting it off economically, an internal collapse or a major inside group would be better for us than a forcible ejection from their territory especially if that ejection was done through american motor. The defeat, how it looks like is the denial of the territory. Its the end of the territory but not the end of the story. They have variances and presence in nigeria and libya. An important point. Im glad you pointed that out, again, anybody else have a different definition of defeat . My next question is im no military expert and i dont think we have one on the panel, no offense. Expertise has been very valuable here. How far away are we from that definition of defeat . As i said, i dont think anyone on the panel could say. Number one looking to internal resistance movements is very important. I agree with j. M. At the end of the day if the defeat comes from within, thats going to be a much more resounding defeat. How possible is that . The question is how, theres two things to this. Number one is how robust are they . In the past we saw very robust instance to them. The u. S. Played a role in helping to insure they werent destroyed. A lot of the movements are also people we dont like. We have on the one hand probably baptist resistance movements and i would say almost certainly you have al qaeda resistance movements which plays in the struggle of struggle. While i think that baghdad is replaceable, once you have a succession, especially with an organization like that, that might cause greater mag menation with isis. The final thing we look to is youve given theyre a bit overstretched militarily. You could possibly see a rapid reversal just like when the u. S. Engaged in the Campaign Early in the iraq war and Afghanistan War and also in libya. There were very rapid reversals of the enemy trying to hold territory. Particularly when your population isnt doing. Talking about engagement with communities and understanding local police all the better but how do we find more move and shakes . How do we find more people like you that have had a change of heart and your cramericaapacity and capability to turn people away from this . I wish we could clone me. Wink all doi think we all do as well. I try to do the right thing. I got here because i believe i did make the right decisions. When we say em pourmtpowerment it needs to be clear for the intelligence community. After theyve been veded and need to have continual monitoring, to have them step up and go to muslim conferences and let them be seen on main stream media where people hear the message. I dont want to be the only person. A lot of times i feel frustrated and see im the only guy doing it. Nobodys doing enough of it. There are others like me out there that just dont know how to come forward and so they will need some direction to do that. I think i speak for all of us when i say god bless you for what youre doing. Im tom carper and i approve that message. God bless you. This one for all you, please. I want to say do you pronounce your name mubin . Its mubin. Have you ever been called mubin. Yes. Then i got called bin then bin laden. We have a ben not like bin laden. Several of my colleagues said in order for the u. S. To have success against al qaeda and isis, you must adequately define the problem and my enemy. They suggest we should announce that u. S. Is in war which is going to make extremism or radical islam in your opinion is it necessary or beneficial for the u. S. To define isis and al qaeda in this manner . The question really is what is the benefit of doing so . Im not sure that theres a benefit in the inexplicitly emphasizing were war with radicalist. Theres a question embedded with that with what is radicalism . In libya, one of the problems is the dignity faction, very high, hes their commander in chief defines ral cal islam defines the enemy. It makes it if one were to support his organization would make it a civil war thats much bloodier and much more defying than it should be. Secondly, the administration has moved away from using redder rancic. Thats a reasonable thing to do in terms of public messages. The area in which i sometimes disagree is that i think if we as analyst arent able to process the i hadcommence its ativan tashs for the u. S. To make its enemy radical islam. It uses the adjective islamic. I believe its an oxymoron. If i could impose to muslim term for these people, and ive given script script reference. The anti christ himself emerging from the last remanence. Those are the two terms i encourage using. We need to understand the religious dimension of this as people studying the problem in terms of public dialogue and in terms of motivation of this we must name the enemy kind of motiff. You know the thing that i think about when i think about this is in 2013 i did a study of the use of twitter and found the people following premises on twitter talked continually and primarily about main stream conservative public politics and we dont insist them be referred to as conservative radicals or republican radicals and i think if its a double standard, its easy to insist when its minority. All right. Thanks. Its something to do with islam. Difficult to say maybe. As you know in religion in this country, i wont speak about other countries but in the prodistant date we have many flavors. We have baptist and presbyterian presbyterian. When we think of the muslim faith, its not just one or two but many. We often times think of them but its not that simple. When you look at the isis, al qaeda, the folks with domination and destruction, i dont notice as much involvement. Is that my imagination or not . Can you speak to that form . With respect to isis and al qaeda you dont have share involvement. Both of them are city movements. Isis is anti sheer. Al al qaeda has tried to constrain that a bit. You also have movements you are kind of part of our coalition in iraq. They pose their own set of problems. That could create make this a longer term problem. So yes, in terms of isis, al qaeda qaeda, absolutely. I certainly wouldnt factor out the importance of some of these militant nonstate groups and one person who has done good on this is phillip at the Washington Institute releasing a major monograph on this earlier this year which is essential with reading for understanding that particular aspect of this conflict. All right. Thanks. Last question, if i could. Could you share with us the story of omar and your experiences with him, please . He was an alabama native. He was born in a family to a serian father and an Irish Catholic mother. He became radicalized and joined alshibab. Where i came in the story is after he joined he got there and discovered things were not to his liking. Foreign fighters were not being treated well. They had a nasty habit of assassinating al qaeda. There was corruption. He took to the internet and put out a video saying look, i have these problems with them and expressed my opinions and now theyre trying to kill me and i need help. This plea was directed to al qaeda central. He imagined someone from al qaeda would ride in to save him which did not happen. He in many ways was a van guard of this emergence of this movement on social media. Prior to about 2012, 2013 the media was much lower and because of omar but also because of other centers from the lock Step Movement people started getting online and they started coming online to argue with omar so they dispatched people to come out and say this guy is a lie yarer and people popped up to push back on that and it escalated from there. Same thing happening from the al qaeda context in the forums. Some of my kmebtscomments about the remote intimacy. You know, when you talk to somebody briefly, every day or every couple of days you can get a sense of them as a person which may be artificial and inflated in your head but they become much more real to you than somebody youre reading about or somebody you correspond with by a post. Very interesting, very informative. I want to thank the panel so much for being here today and really on your written testimony was so strong and put my staff to thinking about these issues in many layers and im grate. For that. In the final minutes of this hearing i would just like the ask you all if you are a senator and i know thats a scary prospect but if you all were senators or even in a high level executive positioning, were looking at the issue of counter communications, we use words like rudimentary before. The vision were trying to get to, if you could push for two years and the chairperson said this should make us think about legislation, what specifically would in terms of strategy and tactics would you want to see being imp plemtlemented on a broader scale by 2016, 2017. Anybody can pick that up. Maybe we can go online. I think we often look at this problem in a way thats very inefficient and isnt getting to the solution. You in your previous testimony spoke to this. I referenced the u. S. Government as a legacy industry and i dont say that lightly. A lot of established companies have seen it beneficial to create a start up in the accompany. Thats been a very successful thing for a number of companies to do. I point into it the tax accompany as one who did a good job of creating an interesting tax app where people through their cell phone could get all tax documents and they did this very much like the start up would do. Creating the start up within a broader accompany. With respect to this specific issue, social media, i would want to see a start up within the u. S. Government. You would want to get the best people on board and theres a few layers in that. One is are we able to work with the right people . Yesterday i spent the morning with a businessman who owed owner a media accompany who had these adds on his computer his accompany put together. He knows the region well and looking to shop around. The production value was extraordinarily high. Are we getting the right value . Do we have the right people in place multiple things make it hard to have the right people in place. One of the things i would look at is looking at the broader rules that prevent us as a government from having the best people in place to tackle the problems. I want to interrupt because i want to get through the whole panel. Anything you would like the provide in the days after the hearing in the image you said i would love to pounce on because i think youre speaking not only a truth but youre speaking an urgent truth. Just to move in. Very quickly. Subject experts to guide and train whether theres law enforcement, military whatever it is. Ultimately, an on themyautonomy of efforts on the ground. Often you can delegit economize the organic voices when you put a u. S. Government stamp on that. Its important to have strategies that create an atmosphere in which the voices can emerge without being delegitimized by the u. S. Government. Were getting creamed on social media. We talk about sfce. Theyre working with a hand full of twitter accounts. What would have an impact and get around some of the log jams of government in terms of content would be to have hundreds or thousands of accounts putting out even very inokayous messaging to get us into the space. We can define the message as we go. Theres a risk in government that prevents us from doing things that are experimental and baring in that space. If were out in the space first then we can figure out where to take the ship after then. If you look at isislanguage propaganda, theyre saying its not your friend. We should be giving every Technical Assistance a turkey and reinforcing and congratulating them. The other thing we should do is to be building a database of every foreign fighter from the west. We know one in nine foreign fighters returning to the u. S. Will engage in terrorism. We need to know exactly who these people are to the best of our ability. Gentleman, thank you very much for a great panel and for your work on these issues. Im grateful. Ive learned a lot. Thanks. Other experts you can put us in terms with. How do we do this . Is it inside outside, whatever . Its urnlt. One thing i do like to do is provide the witnesses a final bite of the apple here. If theres something you want to get off your test. Looking forward, we have a chance not to have a hearing like this five years from now. If we change, the idea that were going to turn off the lights of our presence there on december 21st, 2016, and the afghans would want us to stay. We were attacked from there obviously on 911. Its our interest to say we plan to stay. We have an agreement for 2024. The work has already been laid out. Im looking forward, this is a proactive measure to prevent having the same kind of hearing several years from now. I hope weve learned fail states are not good for security. Indeed. I think isis is the radical social change ahead of us and we need to be prepared to see what happens when people can communicate in these daily routine ways with people of similar interest aroun