video. In this one, I'm going to be talking about why the narcissist hates you. Because by now it should be no secret that they do hate you. They can't stand you. But a lot of you may not know the reason why. And I am going to get into that in this video.  So yeah, that is what we are going to be talking about in this video. The reason why the narcissist hates you. Because a lot of you may not understand the reason why. But I'd just like to say, you know, there is a fine line between love and hate. They're almost the same thing. Because either way, there is an intense feeling. You care about it. You're very interested. You're very concerned about it. To where it fuels these emotions. And that's what it really is when they hate. As I've said before, narcissists, they are haters.  But if you ask them the reason why, they probably couldn't tell you. Because they lack self-awareness. They don't really know why they do what they do. But the reason why they hate you. It's because they have an inferiority complex. They feel inferior to you. They think that they are less than you. And that you are more than them. So they hate on you to make themselves feel better about that. By making you miserable. And they're doing that while you're trying to be nice to them. You're just trying to love them. You don't see how they see. You don't see it that way. You're not thinking about who's better. There's not a competition in your mind. But they cannot receive your love. Which is why it's like no matter what you say, no matter what you do for them, they cannot reciprocate your love for them. Because they're not receiving what you're putting out. They can't receive it because they're very insecure with who they are as a person. And they're looking at your achievements and accomplishments as something that just happened. It was luck. They're not thinking about all of the work that you put in. They just see this finished product of what you've become. And when they first meet you, initially they do admire that. They like it. But then they start to turn against it. Because then they realise that they are not you. And they cannot control you.  And that is the reason why they never complimented you on your achievements or success. They were aware of it. But they never gave you credit. Because they don't see the hard work that you put in. They only see the finished product. They don't see all of the steps that you took to get there.  Because they secretly wish that they were you. They wish they had what you had. But of course they know they can't have that. Because they lack the discipline. They lack the ability to maintain a commitment despite difficulty. And they are also very ungrateful. Which is why they were never satisfied with anything you did for them. They lack determination. They lack a strong character, a purpose. And these are all typical traits that narcissists possess.  Because you have those positive qualities and traits that they lack. The determination, the strong character, a firm purpose. And you have made use of those positive qualities and traits to get to where you are today. Because your mindset was different. And that is why you became successful. But of course they don't acknowledge those positive qualities. Because they're only thinking about instant gratification and immediate rewards. Which is why they don't want to work on anything. They don't want to commit. But they will try for a short period of time. But then they will disappear very quickly. And the reason why is because they don't have that right mindset, like you do. The mindset that produces success. Which is why they become very envious and jealous of you. It's why they start to hate you. Because they have an inability to produce what they desire. So they become victims. They feel like the world owes them something. They become very entitled. Because they're looking at it like they're no different to you. So in their minds it's unfair.  But it comes out as arrogance. Where they are exaggerating their abilities and importance. But what they're actually doing is they are trying to compensate for their feelings of worthlessness. That's why they have to exaggerate a lot of who they are. Because they're trying to compensate for how they really feel about themselves. And the problem is they're not doing anything to try to change it. There's a lack of accountability there. And that also prevents them from achieving the result that they want. Because they don't even want to work on anything. They just develop this victim's mindset. Because they feel like they're never really going to achieve what they want. They're never going to get what they really want to have. And that is what causes them to engage in this extreme behavior. Some of them will cheat, lie and steal. Because in their minds they are the victim and it is unfair. So why should they have to play by the rules? Why should they have to act right? This is why they are so impulsive. This is why they make such reckless decisions which leave them even more worse off in an even more less advantageous situation. Or even decisions that affect other people's lives. Because they cannot think logically and rationally. They cannot make considered decisions or come to sensible conclusions. Because they are out of touch with normality and reality. They don't have an exit strategy. They see no way out of it. They just feel like everything is against them. Everything is unfair to them. So they become a hater.  They have no regard for what you've accomplished and achieved. They disrespect it. Or they ignore it. They just don't care about it. Because it's not them that they secretly in desire and wish that it was them. They don't respect what you've done or what you have. They're just trying to find a way to steal it from you or trick you into giving it to them. Because they do not want to put in the effort and work. They don't believe in behaving honestly and fairly and following the rules. So yeah, they greatly dislike it when they see your progress and success. It really gets to them. Because you are happy. And you're doing well. But they don't believe that it can be done fairly and honestly. They think that you've got to lie and deceive and manipulate people. So what do they do? They end up hating you.  And why? Because it takes a lot of time, energy and effort for them. Just to get a mere fraction of what you can do so easily and effortlessly. Because you put in the work, you figured out how to do it. And you know how to do it well. And you do it by using your own qualities, talents and skills, which are things that they do not have. Things that they do not possess so it irritates them. Because while it may be so easy and effortless for you, for them, they have to put in a lot of time and effort. So their entire life becomes this big hustle where they have to work tirelessly and rapidly. But there is a lot of disruption, confusion and uncertainty. Because everything is rough and harsh. Everything is very hard for them. So if they have to live their lives in that way, while they have to watch you have it easy, or at least they think you have it easy because they're not looking at the hard work that you had to put in. And that is why it affects them so greatly.  And why?  In many ways, in more ways than one. And that is why they hate. That is why they can't stand you. Because they see it that it's so easy for you. At least that's what they assume. Yet everything is so difficult, so hard for them. That's why they hate, that's why they envy, that's why they become so competitive. If you notice, though, it's like they always see everything as a competition with you. They're always trying to be better than you. They're always trying to act like they don't need you. You're not important to them. You're just not, you don't even matter, you're not even relevant. They go out of their way to make you feel that way. Because they do actually recognize your significance and importance. But they hate it. Because they want to be that. They know that they can't. But this is why, once you've been around them for enough time, they act in opposition to you. In rebellions and defiance. They want to fight against you. They want to show you that they're different. They have to always be in disagreement with you. They can't act at accordance with what you want. And this is why it's because of that envy, that hatred, for your success and accomplishments and seeing as though you have it easy. Well, it's so hard for them. But this is why you cannot sustain a meaningful connection with them. And this is the problem that a lot of you get into because you're looking at it like, I want to build a relationship with this person, have a future, maybe even get married and have kids. You're looking at it the wrong way. And this is why things always go wrong. Because you're using them for the wrong purpose. They're not designed. They're not built for that. And that is why, in most cases, it doesn't last long. And it doesn't end well. Because if you look at it, that all they're really trying to do, all they're trying to show you, all they're trying to tell you is that they're not designed for that. They're not designed for the things that you want. You want loyalty and commitment, relationship, marriage, you want all of that. But you're seeking that from the wrong person. Because all they're really good for is something short term of one night stand. And while I don't advise for anyone to engage in that type of behavior, that's really what they're designed for. Just a short term fling. That's why they don't last. That's why they can't stay committed to you over a long period of time. It just doesn't work. And it doesn't matter what you do. It makes no difference. You can give them all of your love and affection. You can promise them the world and even take action to deliver that to them. You can give them all of the reassurance, even if there was the perfect relationship part of walking the gear that would not be enough because they're not designed for that. And the reason why they're not designed for long term commitment and relationships, marriage, the reason why is because they have no image of that in their minds. They never learned that in their childhood. They've never seen that before. They don't even know what a relationship is or how it should be because they've never seen a relationship function. I mean, many of these narcissists, they come from single-parent homes, parents who have been separated, divorced. They've never seen real love, loyalty and commitment. They've never seen it work. So they don't really have any faith or belief in that anyway. You come into them with all of this hope and enthusiasm about things working out, things getting better, but having a future with them. To them, it's completely hopeless. They're looking at it like a lost cause, a means to an end. They don't see it working out because they've never seen it work out before. So how can you expect them to trust you or anyone else? And people like that who they lack faith and trust and the commitment and the staying power, the discipline. You cannot sustain a relationship with someone like that. Their only purpose, all they're really good for is something short-term. Maybe just one weekend or one night stand because after that, it's not going to go well. It's not going to last because they're not meant for that. They're not built for that. They will only turn against you.  They will resent you. But I would advise to not even do that with these types of people. Don't even engage in anything. No one I'd stand, no short-term relationships because it's only going to hurt you in the end. Remember, they don't really feel anything like that. It's not going to hurt them.  You're going to want to have a future with them so it will just hurt you. So avoid anything short-term as well if you can. With these types of people it's really not worth it. It's just going to hurt you in the end. All right that's it. That is why the narcissist hates you. If this video was helpful for you please give it a thumbs up down below. Let me know your thoughts in the comments. Let me know if you agree with this or not and hit that subscribe button. If you haven't subscribed yet then you will receive the notifications for my future videos. If you'd like to book a one-on-one session with me you can do that through my website. It is narcsurvivor.co.uk and check out my Instagram as well. I have new pictures and videos on there every day. It is narcsurvivor.co.uk on Instagram. All right that's it for this one. I'm going to go out and get something to eat. Have a great day everyone.


Sweet Calliope in whom my heart finds blissful repose the summer months take me unawares in these sparsest of quarters dread not sweet hound obviously with everything going on the world we have to be wary of not only our health but our loved ones health so I've been sending letters on a weekly basis to all my friends and family pray tell what be the hour what be the day whence has mighty soul hung his golden head it's felt millennia it's felt a fortnight if not longer literally ten minutes my roommates callousness distresses of my humors I know his heart's in the right place trying to keep in touch with his family I mean I talked about family on a daily basis to I just don't understand why he has to do it through letters I mean he's just literally throwing him out the window saying this letter or reach him fly upon the winds of chance sweet one and carry my message to the one I love and so like I said before I know his heart's in the right place so I'm trying to help him out and I've been melding the letters for him I mean just to see him happy I guess it couldn't hurt anything but I will try to talk him into using the cell phone


Almost time for the bell, how many options, will you sell? Fire up your platform, get ready to enter But first, let's get the mindset centered We follow the plan, that's how trade it Have success, find what works for you and forget the rest Stats and probabilities is what we're up to Miss greed and doubt, focus on the process Not the money and the profits will flow like honey Power hour, more trade hackers, get ready to go Zero-day options, time to make bank Get locked and loaded, then be ready to plank What's up everyone, welcome to Power Hour Live Tuesday, January 30th Hope all is well Watch is talking to me Hope everyone's doing well S&P is unchanged as we speak NASDAQ down 109 Russell down 14, Dow up 118 Gold and silver slightly green Notes and bonds slightly green Ten-year yield down almost 1% Oil up one and a quarter Natty gas up 2%, grains all up One and a half to 2% Euro and the pound, Euro slightly green Pound unchanged, Bitcoin up a little over half percent VIX down 1.69% Sitting at 13.37 Is S&P gonna blow through highs today? It's hovering, it's hovering right there Alt-time high, hit early day 49.30 Currently at 28.5 Unreal So for Power Hour today So right in between strikes So my bot would go inverted I'm gonna, I'm gonna I'm just gonna do a little discretionary Power Hour trading I just I don't really want to load up I've got these strikes surrounded right here I've got two re-entries on And I've got a quiet lunch Half of my quiet lunch still on On the two and three strikes Out of the money All around where we're at now So I really don't want to load up anymore If we get to a strike At the money straddle would be Seven Ish Maybe Close to it But So I've got Got my remaining quiet lunch on Just looking good as we speak Ugh There it goes My two re-entries One is kind of pushing up It's down a little bit The other is Up a couple hundred so I'm just gonna roll with what I've got And potentially play Something else if we If we move Yeah so I've got My AM number one's closed out My I got a lunchtime number one still on And lunchtime number two I put on Hoping we would get a little bit of a pullback Or at least we would At least maybe I would book 20% profit Before it went up But See it looks like it was the What bar was this Was the one The time was it 120 central It shot up through that little Consolidation on me So without booking 20% so So I'm kind of in the same boat with power I'm just kind of 49-30 straddle would be it Maybe you didn't want to go through highs Didn't quite get there So my lunchtime number two Is testing the upside So normally I would enter a centered one The problem is that The premium's just not there So yeah premium's getting a little Skimpy today I don't know if I want to put it on a straddle I'm gonna give it some time I'm gonna give it 10-15 minutes To see what price does Or does it blow through highs My futures position says it blows through highs I'm long some ES here I did take a futures trade in silver as well Got stopped out so that was minus 770 Take another ES Looking forward to blow through all time highs I got stopped out on that one so that was down And then this one I'm currently in is up One of my re-entries I've got a 20% profit target at 410 It's currently trading at 455 So getting close This one here My AM number one Was a $1635 $1,635 winner Number two, $1,790 winner My lunchtime number one will be a winner And the jury is out on my Lunchtime number two I did have two other Re-entry this morning NTT that both hit 20-40-60 profit target So I got in at the open Now I hit all three profit targets And then I got in here at about 10-06 And that one hit all three Expected move today To the downside was about 4906 To the upside 49-45 Have not even sniffed Anywhere close to that Had that little Jolt from the jolts And it's been pretty choppy What do we have here About a 30 to About a 14-point range all day Can't ask for much more than that Selling zero DTE premium So I'm going to take a look at this straddle David Junkie, did you get some Real-time paper trade data? All right, good Yeah, that's kind of a If you're, you know, trying to practice to go When you go live, you definitely want to You definitely don't want 15-minute Delayed data that make a huge Difference with those So I'm looking at this 49-30 straddle It doesn't look too bad 630 premium So is that the 30-25s bumblebee? So I got to fill it 640 on that And I went smaller than I normally do Just so you know Position size down just a little bit In case we get it repeated yesterday Chad, what's your position size plan? Are you going to start ramping up Or are you going to stick with kind of a It's a good question It's a good question Yeah, you know, actually I was thinking about that just a few days ago I typically have been doing 6, 8, 10 Throughout the day Every now and then I'll do 8 or 10 in the morning So I may be ramping up my mornings Yeah, I've actually My power hour too, I may be ramping up 12, 14 contracts here in the near future But it's funny you ask that Because like I said, I was thinking about that actually Just the other day Yeah, I didn't know if you had a specific plan Or not My default contracts are 10 So it's easy just to do 10 So power hour With that was a 640 fill That would put me at a 5, 10 5 dollars 10 cents Profit target with a Trailing stuff of 4 Yeah, premiums were low, Kelvin And I've got I've got trades all around The Two strikes out of the money Three strikes out of the money So I'm just going with what I've got here Which is a couple of re-entries From earlier as well as Half of my quiet lunch One of my re-entries is about to hit 20% It's trading at 430 My limit's at 410 What did I just do? Somehow I just closed three of my Strattle at 630 When I got filled at 640 Did you put your trailing stop in wrong? Something I think I did The stupid Stupid shark robot thing was Coming by my chair And right as I was putting in the order And I bit down to stop it Oh yeah, blame it on the Zumba And so because it makes noise And it's distracting And then all of a sudden I heard a The ring getting filled I've heard Zumba, Dick Okay, so essentially what I did Was I cut my Trade in half so it's Instead of six contracts I got three contracts Let's try this again I guess if this thing rips to the upside I'll be happy I think Zumba's a type of dancing It's like a dance lesson, isn't it? Dick, hey Zumba, Roomba Whatever, it's called iRobot iRobot You can name it When you have them Like the app you name it Guess what The name of my iRobot is What's that Can you guess? You think you can guess? I don't think I can Mahomes Oh wow You gotta keep that That's the name of it So I hit 20% on one of my NTT re-enters here How many of those did you put on today? Or did you say that already? Yeah, I did two earlier that Hit all three profit targets Hit the two on that I'm in right now And there's another 20% on my other one I hit something too here Red bar coming in So I hit 60% on my lunchtime number one Nice, nice And I've got two of ten contracts Left on that one Looks like we got an ECB guy Talking right now ECB president Lagarde Just hit 20% of my lunchtime too Quiet lunch is dead centered My profit target is 90% Currently at about 86% Alright, so I got Half of my lunchtime number two At 470 So my next target for that one Would be 355 Trailing stop at 355 Didn't quite edge up to a new all-time high Or pull them back Thank goodness All winners for my Reentry NTTs today We'll see how Good of winners these last two are So my power hour Is testing the downside It was good to take some risk off So if we do If we do move, I still may enter something else So if this Market falls apart here and starts Really dropping Then accidentally closing out Three of my six contracts Would Would be helpful, would have helped me See what happens You're pretty good at benefitting From those mistakes Chad Lately I have been I've benefited from Some mistakes I should have scaled down a little bit yesterday Honestly in power hour I was up 4500 bucks This is my Strattle what I got here at power hours Strattle you can see where it's Kind of testing that left side But like I said I Went in with six contracts instead of my normal Ten and then I accidentally cut three At Ten cents below where I got filled Put on a one two DTE double calendar Earlier it is up About four percent I was hoping to take some of that off I went in with pretty decent size Because sometimes you'll get a quick ten percent pop Same day Currently up about five percent My five sevens up twenty percent I took half of that off earlier today My six sevens up about fifteen percent I have not taken any of that off yet I was hoping to get ten percent Elliot to take any off But I may shed a little bit At the end of the day Just to lighten up my position Because I went in a little bigger size Than I normally do But I like on the day before FOMC a lot of times those things Will give you ten percent same day That's why I went in with bigger size I'm in the Forty eight nineties Forty nine seventies Same as you I got in at I got filled at six ninety five Would you get in it? By the way I bought Some more ES futures on this little dip I just don't think S&P can stay away from new all-time highs I just don't think it can It's a magnet Getting close to forty percent On one of my Re-entries Trading at three twenty five Limits at three oh five All-time lows, wow That would be something What is the all-time low? I don't know A hundred Ten? I would love to see like just Lows of A couple months ago Not gonna be a Power hour number two for me Vixx is holding steady Had that contraction early in the day And then it just baseline basically So back I don't know In the fall or I guess summer What was How wide was the power hour I had condors you were getting Well it was more End of twenty twenty two Beginning at twenty twenty three Was the real heyday Okay How wide Like the first tranche of power hour I mean we were seeing You know ten fifteen twenty wide Oh gosh It was glorious You know that's why I talked to many people about what I'm doing here And I always tell them like I don't The market really isn't good to be doing this I'm still booking really good profits And so Couldn't imagine what if it would just Get a little more volatile and get some One day One day it'll come Cause I was looking at When I was doing some Performance reporting I was looking back On my April power hour Trades And I was doing like six contracts Of tranche one three contracts Of two and one one contract Of tranche three I just hit forty percent one of my trades And You know I Don't know I think I made like thirty or forty Grand in one month Position size Wow and then I looked like October was I think my best Month of the year but I was doing Like three times the position size October was really good but Was like my position size was Way way bigger So what was your risk when you were doing this You know One contract what was the I was using like four dollar stops On tranche one three dollar stops On tranche three and Two dollar stops on tranche Three dollars Stops on tranche two and two dollar stops On tranche three Oh bring it a little bounce up That straddle see We'll fill twenty percent My pin on that straddle is Forty nine thirty Get close to hitting eighty percent And to be out Of my lunchtime Number one Eighty percent would be a buck ten Currently at a buck seventy So I've just got one contract left on each of my Re-entries Quiet lunch is Sitting at eighty eight and a half percent Looking for ninety So what do you got there theta You got the plus Was that about Third plus thirteen hundred definitely Was that my read that right Oh yeah up there in the top left Okay I was just trying to add those in my head Nice rank hitting Power over one Looking for forty percent of my lunchtime Number two I got an order at three fifty five it's currently At four forty five So unfortunately I went a little lighter on trades Than I normally would have as Around midday I had to be away from my computer So I didn't I didn't do a DKS I didn't do as many re-entries as I May have Do the one quiet lunch Still a good day though One of my bots just did I did the O2 DTE double calendar this morning Little winner Forty percent on half my quiet Lunch and then about to hit Ninety percent on the second half And then four for four on the NTT's I didn't my plan was to do more NTT's Cause my Tuesday trade is the Early exit I'm not really that big of a fan of anyway So I scrapped that And entered an NTT at the open 1735 is a good day So tomorrow for the FOM So no power hour live stream tomorrow Chad will be streaming live in the morning It's a good morning today And then no power hour live stream But we'll stream starting Fifteen minutes before FOMC So that's twelve forty five central You can check out My trade plan I'll do the two FOMC trades which Is selling an iron condor Right before the data released Closing it out right after pal Takes the stand And then entering A long strangle Right after the press conference starts And And I'm also going to Same time that I enter my FOMC iron condor I'm also going to enter A one DTE Nothing in the morning for me And you guys having almost identical trades Starting to think alike I like the I like the trailing down And then the ratchet down of stops I just don't like how much manual entry it is So I've been Playing with trailing percent stops Trailing Premium stops Trailing plus ratchet I definitely like the How it reduces risk When you ratchet it down but It's just a lot of A lot of manual Watching and Waiting and Manual ratcheting I'm not sure exactly What I'm going to do there yet What would be fantastic if trade steward Would come out with their trailing stop Then I could still use trade Steward to manually enter but then it would Automate the stop process That would be Ideal Ratcheting or trailing of stops And trade steward is manual At this time I'm knocking on the door of my 90% Profit target here on the quiet lunch Currently trading at $1.35 Steven It's a historic month for me Profit wise Yup And right there just Locked it in I believe Got out of half of my Power hour number one I don't think there's any way I could I needed to Have a seven grand day to hit Six figures in January Awesome Started the day at $93,368 Beautiful Never in my wildest dreams That I ever think I would Hit six figures in a month That's big time Especially in that Short of a time period from going from paper trading to Real trading So your goal next month is $200k then, right? Man, I honestly Haven't even thought about it It's just been such a wild ride over the last couple months Of just the success I've just never seen so much Consistent success New all time highs Ladies and gents I gotta get my stop in to this straddle Although It's almost dead center now I've still better get it in Stopped out of my remaining contract on One reentry I got stopped out of stuff too here My quiet lunch was sitting at 90% and it did not hit Did not fill That's it Still at 82% But hopefully this thing doesn't Get all yesterday on this What am I doing? Still hanging on to four ES futures In case this thing wants to rip So my 40% for this straddle would be 385 and that would also be My trailing stop Now it's looking like My mistake Kind of hurt me but Can't complain 367 million To the sell side Early indication Yeah, Vicks got a little pop going on that New all time high My lunchtime number two was stopped out After booking 20% So that's pretty much scratch trade And my last two contracts Of Lunchtime number one That stopped at 225 Let's see if I got calls That are worth anything My quiet lunch showing up 91% Still hasn't filled trading to buck 25 There it is Filled it at buck 35 So the only thing I have left is one of My re-entry is one contract And it's nice and centered 60% profit target at 205 It's trading at 255 I came back down didn't it Lunchtime number one was 2105 In profits and my lunchtime number two Was Minus 175 bucks So I just got two contracts left Of my Straddle We'll pull back to poke its head up Retrace right away Vicks still climbing a little bit Yeah poke its head up just to stop me out of Two trades That might have taken me It took me under seven grand for the day Two so You got to get over six figures tomorrow Then you got one more day I spoke a little bit too soon Unless these two straddles Two straddle contracts Everybody need to go back and delete all your Congratulatory posts to Chad I was putting in orders, OCOs I didn't even read them So you're saying Chad just went wide right on that one Yeah no kidding man Really jinxed it I definitely jinxed it myself Yeah cause now it's really falling And my straddles are going to get stopped So yep looks like I'm going to need tomorrow Man it jinxed myself dammit Didn't like all time highs today No sniffed it and Instead of Water's cold Five minutes left Hot Norwood man I have a friend that's a bills fan Who's their current kicker Is that him? No Norwood it was the one that Yeah when the bills were in the Super Bowl With Jim Kelly a quarterback Yeah yeah yeah Who's the guy that just missed it wide right against us I don't remember his name I didn't text my buddy after that game I knew he was devastated Yeah bass that's right Yeah That we came back in 13 seconds The AFC title game A few years ago I let him have one of my season tickets And he flew in from LA cause that's where he lives And he brought a buddy of his And so the three of us were sitting there And when they scored with 13 seconds left Like The jubilation they had Was like almost they were in tears They were so happy And then you know We kick a field goal in 13 seconds And went overtime Like to see I didn't even know what to say to them to be honest with you Yeah The bills fans I was at the game too All the bills fans around us Were just oh man they were Talking so much trash Yeah It was just complete devastation Ripped their hearts out To completely end of the spectrum Emotionally you know Up and down I went with Brian Matt B and Brett And Brian was driving he was so pissed that he left Those three left And I stayed I was like I'm not leaving we still gotta give a kickoff And yeah they were I would have missed the whole deal I would have never forgiven myself If I would have left I told him I said you know These heartbreaking losses Like it'll make it that much sweeter when it does happen For you guys It's a great quarterback but This year might have been their year And you know my homes goes in and just takes it from They may not They may not win one As long as my homes is going to be around I can get a little bounce back to center I should be able to hit my 60% here On my last remaining Yeah I'd like to see this bounce back up to 49-30 That would be a pin I do like the Vicks going up though So my one two DTE Is now up about 7% So it's trying to get me 10% I think touched all the time I just came right back Come on SPX I command you to go to 49-30 Yeah I probably need to save it for a day that it means more I mean I'm already going to have a green day today So I just need to save that Vicks really climbing Slime, climb, climb It's just pumping in some more premium for FOMC Still at 367 million to the sell side With under 20 minutes to go We get a bounce here I'm actually going to lower my limit order Try to squeeze a little bit more out of here Got to have something on going into the bell I'm actually looking at trade steward Naughty dog when I say that Because it is nice It actually shows you the percent profit right here These are all closed But it does the same thing while it's live Just kind of nice Well if I would have left my order at 60% It would be hitting Shortly If we keep Stay here or bounce a little bit But I reduced it to a buck So let's see if my Discretion pays off here Michael Todd you all Out Or do you have a number two Another 4k day for you Michael Todd Nice Moro I just saw you ask that question About my other day trading strategies I don't Those are a lot riskier Because there's no stops So Mighty 90 and runners Are usually somewhere between like 3 and 6k 3 and 7k a month Might start going bigger in those too though Still 367 million sell side My power hour Still hanging in My one power hour trade I've gotten out of 20% 385 Is my next target 40% it's currently at 5 bucks Michael Todd Probably need to start up in his Contracts too right The real question Michael Todd Has had your girlfriend's account do today I don't know One thing I'm on the verge of doing Shutting down my Airbnb Vix Starting to roll over now 49 30s pin Job fish I'm gonna go ahead and lower My profit target on this See if I can get back up to 7k Trading your P&L No 385 Is my target it's at 435 425 My next one be 640 260 I'm gonna lower this to 260 I'm gonna have two contracts left So I set my power 60% profit Skipping the 40% Mark it on close Inbalance incoming shortly Anything over 3 billion 1.6 billion buy side Whoa Oh sell excuse me Oh No MOC trade Two more points higher for a pin Order on my last one at a buck Straighten at a buck 40 10 minutes to go 49 30 straddle Nice be more trader Okay, so I've blown through my 40% profit So Yeah Laura I'm gonna Trade the two FOMC trades in my trade plan The Short iron condor Before the data release and then the long Strangle after the press conference Conference starts the only difference is I'm also going to I'm not gonna do a one DTE trade in the morning But I'm gonna put my one DTE on About the same time that I do my FOMC iron condor And for me I'll look at You know depending on what price does In the morning I'll still look at putting on an AM iron condor But Definitely won't I want to be out of positions Or or have booked You know 40% profit 60% profit Maybe I have a contract or two left but My one of my two red dates I've had Since I've been trading this way Happened on the 18th I think I posted that earlier K loss right over the lunch hour When he was talking Those are my two lunchtime trades big losers My last contract Is about to fill at a dollar trading Tomorrow and Vicks all the way back Down Hold its head up a little bit Get back up to 49 30 It's close to a buck now it's back up to a buck 60 Not gonna be Not gonna happen for me should have Took him my 40% profit Five minutes to go So close to a dollar it's back up to 260 I was Ten cents from getting stopped One two-point bounce I'll get me There we go just a little bit higher You see 49 25 49 26 There we go filled in a buck Didn't even have to get to 25 Keep going Three minutes It's trying 49 30 Vicks meanwhile hitting lows of day Wow Look at that range Today on the daily bar I mean that is just a Little speck Good San Ray Glad to hear things are starting to come together I know it's kind of a Feels like a foreign language at first But Once you start actually Doing the trades Paper trade And a little bit of real money Start kind of understanding what we're talking about It all comes together pretty quick Work on that you can work on your Nerves by paper trading Nice Cosmo Already got your trades uploaded and everything With Trader Sync Well here we go a little markup into the close 40 seconds 49 30 26 Keep going Not going to do it I needed the push that it had Yesterday 4 3 2 1 Ding Alright all take care have a good night Livestream Chad's in the morning And then we'll be back for FOMC At 1245 central Take care have a good night You guys


Allah to say the sin I'm gonna change it into Hassanat. What kind of mercy is this? Remembrance of Allah removes the sins attracts divine mercy.  Everything else does tasbeeh. Malayka they do tasbeeh. The mountains they do it does tasbeeh. Ma min shayin illa yusabbihu bi hamdi. Wala killa tafqahuna tasbeehahu. Allah doesn't tell the mountain to do thick. Allah doesn't tell Malayka to do thick. Allah doesn't tell the trees to do thick. Why? Because thicker means remembrance. You only ask someone to do thick if they have the potential to forget. Do Malayka forget for them to do thick? Doesn't they moon the sun? Are these entities that forget? Only insan is invited to remember because some arab linguists they say the word insan some say that it comes from the word nisyan which means to forget because it's in the nature of the human being to forget. This is why Allah has legislated Salat five times a day. If there was no Salat you know we human beings we forget who we are so Allah has to remind us. He makes us put our faces on the ground so we remember where we came from and where we're going. If it wasn't for this Salat on a regular basis many of us would become like Pharaoh.  There's a hadith from the holy prophet where he says there is not a single group of people who come together and they remember Allah except that a caller will call out to this congregation a caller will call out to this majlis to this gathering saying that rise up for Allah not only has he forgiven you know it would be merciful if Allah says you have a clear record now it would be merciful of Allah to say you know what the sin is still on your record but I'm not going to punish you you know sometimes if you speed right if you have a heavy foot you get a ticket but maybe they'll wave the fine right you don't pay a fine but it's still on your record maybe they can remove it from your record if we commit sin and Allah says it's on your record but there's no adab Allah would be merciful if Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala says I will remove the adab and I'll remove it from your record this would also be a rahmah but for Allah to say the sin I'm going to change it into hasanat what kind of mercy is this that I will transform the sins into good deeds and I will reward you this is the power of dhikr is this a lord who is eager to punish brothers and sisters there was a man Hassan al-Basri he comes to Imam Zayn al-Aabideen he says you know sometimes you meet people you know they're not that religious and they're shocked they're like how are you so religious it's difficult it's going to be difficult to go to jannah so many do's and don'ts this man is saying the same thing to Imam Zayn al-Aabideen I'm amazed how does someone attain salvation so much red tape so many rules you know you oh you look at the book of our marajah it's a thick book so much haram ustahab makrut a lot of rules a lot of do's and don'ts what does the Imam say does the Imam say you know you're right it's difficult the Imam says he says as for me I am shocked I am amazed at the one who is punished by Allah in the hellfire despite the fact that Allah is so merciful this is really a jib to go to the hellfire


Well good afternoon. I'm David Sanger. I'm a national security correspondent for the New York Times. It's good to be here. I remember from college this was always the most dangerous lecture time. It's after you've eaten lunch, if they make the mistake of putting the lights down low, I once took an art course after lunch, you know, we could have everybody asleep out here. But in order to prevent that, we have a fabulous panel for you today and and two old friends. Kori Shake is a fellow at Hoover. Hoover Institution, she was the director for defense issues, defense strategy, and requirements at the National Security Council. She worked during the Bush administration in the Pentagon, the State Department, and the NSC, redefining the concept of three circles of L. And so that was Kori's time. Jeremy Basch here was chief of staff to Leon Panetta, both at the CIA and at the Department of Defense. That usually means that you get the six o'clock phone call from the New York Times that says, we're about to go publish the story that says, it was always pleasant, weren't they Jeremy? That was some of our greatest time together. I used to say, I'm sorry you have the wrong number. I've gotten that line before. And he was before that the chief counsel of the House Intelligence Committee and now is of course at Beacon Global Strategies. So what we thought we would do is spend a few minutes talking about the big challenges that the president faces in these next two years, a little bit about the inheritance he will leave to his successor. And a bit about what foreign policy issues are likely to play and loom large in the presidential campaign. So let's start with sort of the news of today and the coming week. President yesterday pulled off a climate change agreement with the Chinese that I think many of us had doubts about whether or not the Chinese would come around on. Significant achievement, one that many climate change critics I think will probably object to. In the next two weeks he's going to have to make a decision about whether or not the deal that is in front of him with the Iranians on the Iranian nuclear issue is good enough for these purposes whether to kick forward because it's nobody's interest to let the entire thing collapse. Whether or not this is an agreement that could actually reformulate American alliances in the Middle East. These are two of the biggest legacy issues that are out there for him. So Jeremy, let me start with you since you spent a lot of time between the White House, the CIA and DOD. The President looks at these next two years. Are these the legacy issues? How will they play out and what are some that we're missing that you think we may hear about in the next two years? Thanks David and first of all thanks to Dr. John Hamery and Dr. Catholics for putting on this fantastic conference. Look, I think this trip to Asia is enormously important and I think the president is showing that the rebalance is alive and well and that this is a critically important part of his legacy and it goes beyond the incredibly ambitious and groundbreaking agreement that they struck with the Chinese over the last few weeks where if you think about having the Chinese say that 20% of their energy sources are going to come from clean energy sources like wind and solar by 2030. It's pretty incredible and it's something that I don't think anyone predicted would happen, but it's beyond that. It's in addition lowering tariffs on certain in the WTO and certain technology exports which will strengthen our export base and will create and strengthen tens of thousands of American jobs. It's also enhancing and strengthening US-China mil-to-mil relations, which is something that hasn't gotten a lot of attention, but if you think about the potential that that can be for a spark for conflict, having this coordination, a code of conduct for the unintended encounters at sea and building on that, I think that's important. And then what I thought was really interesting about this trip is that the president used the occasion in Beijing to have a meeting with the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries, which is to strike this really landmark trade deal or to actually make progress on this really important trade deal and to indicate that there is progress in sight and to do it in Beijing as if to signal we are here in the region to stay and this is not a threat to China and our economic future isn't inherently bound up in this region. So I think the rebalance to Asia is something that the next president will inherit and it'll be very strong. Let me just mention I know we'll come back to Iran in the context of the discussions. I don't think my bottom line on Iran is even if we have a verifiable comprehensive deal on stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, I think the next president will still have to contend with Iran. And if you look at even what the president himself said on Face the Nation this past Sunday, he said the nuclear issue is one thing we're concerned about, but we're also concerned about the role Iran is playing in the region through its surrogates, through its proxies, through its efforts at regional instability. And so we're not taking our eye off the ball on Iran. I think that's the right approach. I think it's the thing the president will the next president will deal with. And let me just conclude by saying overall in terms of legacy, look, I mean the president came in office at bears, I think it bears us all keeping in mind with a huge force presence in Iraq and an under-resourced war in Afghanistan, with al-Qaeda resurgent in Western Pakistan, and with the global security situation really imperiling U.S. interests. And he immediately put Iraq on a path to reducing our footprint there. He doubled down our forces in Afghanistan, search forces in Afghanistan, hunted down al-Qaeda in Western Pakistan, and I think as a result of those things our security situation in the world is much stronger. Corey, let's start with China because you'll remember that when President Bush came in office, there were a lot of people around him who believed that China should be the major theme of his first term, but more in the territory of how you contain its power. Then Iraq came along, that sort of dissipated, and the president ended up talking about how complicated the Chinese relationship was. But beyond the counter-terrorism agenda, I think had a hard time getting to some of the kinds of discussions that President Obama has had. So as you look at climate change issue, as you look at the pivot, if you think it's real or not, tell us whether these will be lasting, and tell us what you think the next president will have to deal with. So I think, David, that to the extent that America has a grand strategy, that grand strategy across the last five presidential administrations has been to persuade China to grow prosperous and democratic. That is that the notion that Bob Zellick captured in the responsible stakeholder is actually what the last five American presidents have been trying to do. So I think what the president did in Beijing is a good thing. I'm a little skeptical on how it comes into practice, and maybe we can talk about that a little bit later. But I do think we've been pivoting to Asia for a long time, and we're mostly doing it in ways that are about alliance relationships and about trade. So I actually think the big story out of the president's trip to Asia is that he didn't get a Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Everybody knows that if it's going to happen in the Obama administration, it'd have to happen soon, and that he couldn't make that political bargain. Actually, I think it's going to be a big part of his legacy, because soft power, remember when the Obama administration came, and soft power was going to be how we engaged the world. We were going to diminish our military role, build up our economic and our political engagement with the rest of the world. And the centerpiece, the achievements of those should be the trade deals with Europe and Asia, and the fact that the president's not focusing on that more, and not building, capitalizing on China's mistakes for the strength and alliances. And let me just give one last example that's not about Asia. You know, the European Union has been a global leader in climate change, and that we struck a bilateral deal with the Chinese without including Europeans in it, strikes me as the kind of thing that's a near-term political success and a long-term political mistake. Jeremy, let me pick up the chorus TPP argument, because usually, politically, if you're going to take up a trade deal, particularly if you're headed toward a presidential election, you want to do it as many milliseconds after the midterms as you can, because they get harder and harder to get through Congress the closer you get to the next election. And, of course, when the president was in Asia last in March or April, I remember I was on that trip, and we were being told that the agreement with the Japanese, which was holding us up, was imminent, you know, we just needed to wait a few weeks. Of course, we're still waiting. Is Corey right? Are they missing the opportunity here? Well, I think, obviously, the goal is to conclude it as quickly as possible. President Clinton concluded the PNTR deal with China late in his presidency, and I think it's less important exactly when vis-à-vis the next election this comes, and rather it's more important to have the agreement be sound. And, by the way, I do think that this is a bipartisan issue. I think that there are people in both parties who support global trade. Sure, there are elements in both parties that oppose it, and I think, if anything, there may have been... Clinton went wide on the Republicans. And I worry a little bit that there may be an erosion in the Republican Party for support for internationalist policies, for global trade. I think that's something we have to keep our eye on as we approach the next two years. But, again, I think this is the right time to do it, and the reports out of Asia are that they've made great progress. And so I think it's now up to the President to conclude the deal, and Ambassador Frum to conclude the deal, and then to work with Congress. Corey, let me take you back to the Iran part of the question that I had asked before to Jeremy. So, the President's laid out a strategy under which, if there is a deal, he will temporarily suspend many of the sanctions in the order in which he's laid out, but he will not necessarily go to Congress to have them lifted, even in his presidency. There are many in Congress, and many in the newly elected Senate, who say, oh, no, we're going to vote on this. So, first, what do you think of the President's strategy? And secondly, if Congress insists that it vote on it and insists on that before November 24th, could that in and of itself undermine the Iranian willingness to go sign this thing? To answer the last question first, I actually think the likeliest outcome is continuing negotiation for the next two years between Iran and the P5-plus-1, because I think that's the configuration that meets everybody's interests best. I, despite what the President has said about, you know, his commitment to destroy the Iranian nuclear program if we don't get a deal, whether or not he'd actually do it, he sure doesn't want to have to do it, and that argues for continuing the negotiations. He hasn't said he would destroy the Iranian nuclear program if they don't get a deal. He simply said he wouldn't let the Iranians get a bomb. He's never told you what he'd do up to the level of threshold of a bomb, right? I thought the APAC speech in 2009 did that. Perhaps I'm mistaken. I think the administration clearly doesn't want to deal with either a collapse of the negotiations or carrying through on its stated reaction to that. And I think in the Iranian case, they bought themselves some leeway on sanctions relief, and it doesn't look to me like they have made the fundamental choice to end their nuclear weapons program. And so I think in the Iranian instance too, continuing negotiation probably serves their interests best. To get to the congressional piece of it, I think it would be madness of the President to do that. I think trying to skirt congressional, you know, Congress has been the major force in putting sanctions in place, often over the objections of the White House and not just this White House. So to circumvent congressional, the lever Congress put in place, especially given that the President has things he would like to achieve, I presume, with Congress in the next two years, I think it would be a really bad choice. I think if he circumvents Congress, they will simply legislate what he had, opposition to what he has done by executive authority. So he can't get an outcome independent of congressional buy-in. I think the President, the White House's time would be much better spent arguing substantively with people on the Hill why the deal, whatever deal they're going to strike, is in the interests of the country and calling the National Security Card, because Congress clearly cares about this issue on both sides of the aisle. You know, the White House will be fighting Menendez, not just Republicans on this. And so building a broad base of support for foreign policy is something the Obama Administration has actually not put time and effort into, and they really ought to. Jeremy, let's assume for a minute that there is either, if not a deal, that Cori's right and this gets spun on, and my guess is she probably is right on this, but there's at least an agreement and principle that enables them to make some progress, make an argument for keeping this going. Does an Iranian deal reorder the way the United States has dealt with Middle East powers or open up that possibility? Or are we going to end the term with essentially the same alignment of interests and adversaries that we had when you were serving in the first term? I think the latter, David, I think as I indicated earlier, and I think Cori would agree with this, that even if we get, as I said, a comprehensive verifiable deal, there are going to be all kinds of questions going forward. There are going to be questions about verification. Our intel is not bulletproof in every instance, and we have seen, and this is fundamentally about trust, and we have seen the Iranian regime mislead and lie directly to the international community before. Remember, they always maintained they didn't have a nuclear weapons program, and we have established definitively through the release of unclassified intelligence assessments that they did have a weapons program that ended in 2003. And of course, one of the very first things that President Obama and then President-elect Obama was briefed on in 2008-2009 was the existence of the underground enrichment facility at GOM, which of course was another effort by Iran to deceive and mislead the international community. So that's why this negotiation understatement of the year has been so tough, because to get something verifiable and to overcome that trust barrier is very, very challenging. And I think that's going to be the kind of thing that we're going to have to stay at for two years and beyond. And as I indicated earlier, I think, first of all, I do think in terms of Congress, I think Congress will have a role, will have a say in what our relationship with Iran is going forward, including sanctions relief. And by the way, I think that's appropriate and necessary. And I think that even if this nuclear deal goes forward and is a success, I still think we're going to be dealing with Iran's role in the region. And to me, the big outcome of the Syria-ISIS crisis that has erupted this summer and that we're in the midst of right now is I think of sort of a major realignment in the Middle East, the likes of which we have never seen, where we have moderate Sunni Arab countries aligned with us, even in many cases aligned with Israel's interests and aligned with Europe's interests to confront both radical Sunni groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda, as well as to confront the rise of an Iranian state that is playing a very unhelpful and dangerous game. So as we've all been reading and as the President himself noted in his letter to the Ayatollah, there is a commonality of interest between Iran and the U.S. in defeating ISIS. How do you play that one? I actually think the commonality of interest is very narrow. We both want to defeat ISIS, but we disagree very widely with the Iranians on why we want them defeated and what we want to see come in its wake. Iran wants to see them defeated in order to create space for Shia terrorist organizations which they have been the major sponsor of throughout the Middle East. Iran worked to destabilize Iraq. Iran worked to destabilize Lebanon. Iran worked to keep Bashar al-Assad in power and Syria. None of those things are in our interest. So I think deconfliction of effort is as far as we should go with the Iranians. And one final reason that I think we ought to be very careful is that something I think both you and Jeremy hit on before is that other countries in the Middle East are very nervous about the possibility of our choice to invade Iraq and our subsequent choices, not carrying out the red line in Syria, the choices that we made about the Democratic Spring in Egypt, Tunisia and other places. Our traditional allies in the region consider us untrustworthy and cooperation with Iran is actually going to give deep-seated roots to that distrust in a way that is going to be very hard to recover. We need to play this much more carefully than it sounds like folks are doing. Jeremy, Cory raised Syria so I didn't have to. Your former boss in his book tour across the country expressed some significant differences of opinion with the way the president handled Syria and talked about the need to have taken a much more active role earlier. Tell us a little, play that out a little bit for us. How would the world look different today had he done so? Well, I think that's a good question, David, because in some ways those who have advocated that we had launched those tomahawk missile strikes at Assad's regime that summer never complete the sentence. And the next sentence is... What do you do the next day? Well, what do you do the next day? Who did that benefit? Because, of course, would that have potentially hurt the Assad regime and potentially accelerated the rise of ISIS and other radical opposition forces? So that's why I think that decision was really a 51-49 decision and a tough one and there may have been implications about credibility in the world that others have talked about. But I think for anyone to pretend that that was an easy decision that we could have just launched missiles in there and then that would have been the end of the story. I think that's not the reality. But that's not what Secretary Panetta was saying. He was talking about a longer term effort against Assad, wasn't he? Well, I think what he was saying was that we have to have a comprehensive strategy for Syria that includes at once going after Assad over the long term and really developing an action plan to end the Assad regime while countering the rise of this al-Qaida offshoot ISIS. Now, everyone in this audience knows what's the game plan if you've got two forces on opposite sides of the spectrum, neither of which are palatable to you, you look for a third way, you look for a third option. And that's exactly what we are doing in trying to find and locate regional partners, build the capacity of those partners to include a moderate Syrian opposition. Let's talk for a little bit about what you think of this set of issues or sets of issues we haven't discussed. We're actually likely to hear as the presidential campaign revs up here. Corey, let me start first with the Republican primary process because unlike the case of the Democrats, there's no clear frontrunner here. So first of all, in this coming election cycle, does foreign policy play a big role? Oh, I think foreign policy will play a huge role. In a way that it did not in the last presidential election. In a way that it did not, Republicans got almost no traction on foreign policy issues in the 2012 election. And I think the sense of anxiety that people have about a newly dangerous Russia, about what's going on in the Middle East, about why we can't, you know, the president set the Syria deadline. Nobody forced them into that. They kind of shooting ourselves in the foot mistakes that the administration has made are going to make it a rich environment for Republican critique. Let me give you my three favorite big lines of foreign policy argument. The first is debt, right? The national debt has doubled in the Obama administration and we paid 435 billion dollars in interest on our national debt last year. That's getting close to the size of the defense budget that we are paying in interest. And if interest rates go up, it is going to crowd out the discretionary spending of the government. It's a big deal that Congress has to put sequestration in place to get any kind of control over spending. So I think the debt and the consequences of the debt, what we look like to the rest of the world right now is people who can't run our own railroad. So ardently advocating the advance of our values in the international order actually depends on us being a terrific example of them. And at the moment we're not either in the conduct of our domestic politics or in the conduct of our checkbook. The second thing I think Russia policy is going to be a big issue and not the original reset because every new administration is smart to take up the option to reset relationships. But that they persevered with that policy long after Russia itself had taken a different course. And I also think Libya factors prominently into this, not in discussion of Benghazi and the killing of the American ambassador so much, as the choice by the Obama administration to use Russian and Chinese approval of a UN Security Council mandate for a humanitarian mission in Libya to prosecute that to regime change looks to me like what marks the turning point where relations become unrecoverable with Russia. And I think the fact that Russia is making a very destabilizing, dangerous set of choices on its periphery is going to be a big issue. The third big issue that I think will come up is alliance relations more generally. That my mom likes it when we're popular in the world and President Obama argued that because he was so special, America was going to be popular in the world again. And it's mostly American foreign policy choices that people are unhappy about. But it is also how we go about making those choices. And I think a lot of America's allies are anxious about just the routine conduct of our foreign policy. Our allies in the Gulf are worried that they weren't told about negotiations with the Iranians. Our allies in Europe feel like they are marginal to what we are doing. We actually just ought to be able to do better than that. Mr. Jeremy, let's take up Cori's three and you can raise her three if you want. So debt, it has doubled, but it was soaring during the Bush administration considerably from where Clinton left it. And it was interesting, you didn't hear very much from Republicans at that time on that issue. They did once President Obama came in. Russia policy, certainly something that came up in 2012 and you heard President Obama almost mockingly say the Cold War is over during the debates you may remember in 2012. And Libya, you had the President himself say in an interview just a few months ago that we probably left too quickly after that because given the chaos that's happened since. So tell us how you think her three will play out and if you've got a different list, give us that. Well, I think Cori's list is a good list, but I think it also exposes and shows how there will be divisions on the Republican side because for every Republican who wants to reduce the debt, there will be others who want to detrigger sequestration and actually have government spending at levels to protect the country. And so I think it will be somewhat hard for folks in the party to reconcile that. Likewise, on the issue of military action, and you say the case of Libya, as I recall some of the strongest voices for military action for taking on Qaddafi came from Senator McCain and others in the Republican Party who were saying and kind of beating on the President to say we have to confront this with the military solution. So I think there's going to be a great debate to be had in the Republican primary over some of these issues. Are we internationalists? Are we isolationists? Do we use military power? Do we use other forms of power? Do we reduce the debt and deficit at all costs? Or do we have appropriate levels of spending? So I think it's a fair list and I think it's a fair set of issues that will be debated. I think issues that I think will be talked about at the end of 2016, first of all, I think there's going to be an important decision about Afghan troop levels. At the end of 2016, the President has said that we're going to draw down our Afghanistan troop presence. And I think there will be elements in both parties that will say that no matter the conditions on the ground, we ought to have no troops in Afghanistan. And there will be others in both parties who will say it should be conditions based and we should evaluate that. And it somewhat will depend on what the conditions are on the ground at the time, the Taliban, the strength of the Afghan government. I think that's one issue. I think a second issue is just continuing to get at al-Qaeda and to continuing the momentum that we have made against al-Qaeda and obviously ISIS somewhat depends on the situation on the ground. If we have arrested their advance, if we have built partner capacity and if we have eliminated some of the safe havens, I think it will look very different than if they have pulled off a major terrorist attack on our soil. And if that's something that the next president will inherit. And third, I'll just mention a sleeper issue that I think could get some attention from presidential candidates and the next president. And that is global internet policy. And some people say, well, what is that all about? And I really think that in the wake of Snowden and the wake of some discussion about how to utilize the internet, both for good economic reasons and also for good national security reasons, there are a couple of challenges out there. First of all, you've got this trend towards ubiquitous commercial encryption, which the FBI director and others have warned against as potentially hamstringing law enforcement. But the second development that's out there is you've got a lot of countries around the world that are interested in data localization, vulcanizing the internet, owning parts of the internet, chopping it up and kind of, in my mind, eroding and eviscerating the free and open internet that has been the engine of such incredible global economic growth. And I think with some three billion people using the internet today and that number going up and two-thirds of that growth being in the developing world, I think this is a big foreign policy and national security issue that the next president will have to deal with. Corey, when you think about that last one that Jeremy raised, first of all, we've set a record here. We've got 35 minutes into a CSIS forum here before the first mention of Snowden, which I think probably is a record for the past year. It's a good trend. So Jeremy's raised at the end an issue that you hear about every day now that you have left Washington and moved to the promised land of the Stanford campus. And while the question of routineized encryption is something that many in Washington stare at and say, how did this become a foreign policy question? Around in a two-mile radius from your office, it's a subject of constant conversation. So is this a national security issue? How did the FBI get on the other side of this from the president's own advisory committee on NSA reforms? So what most people in Silicon Valley would tell you is that it doesn't matter what the government decides on this because of the way the government has run policy on NSA's slate of issues. Industry has taken it into its own hands, and so you may not want a nationalized internet, but that is the consequence of the choices the administration made. And you may not want corporate encryption that doesn't have backdoors built into it, but as we say in the West, that horse has left the barn. It's already, I mean, the new iPhones already are working on. The new iPhone gives you routineized and Google will be right behind it. So what's actually happened is the initiative has flipped. That is that the government will now be running to catch up with what states, nationally, and businesses autonomously are doing. So a question for both of you on this, then we're going to go to one last point on this, which is the Obama administration very often tries to portray its foreign policy choices as though there is what they advocated and there is disaster. And what that does for them is string out the making of any choices, right? Because if you don't make a choice, you don't bring on disaster. And there are real consequences to inaction as well as consequences to action. This is philosophically something they've had wrong. And internet policy actually makes it clear because they have now lost the ability to control not only the debate, but the activity because in the last six years they didn't bring very sensible policies that Jeremy advocates into being. So a question for both of you and then we'll open this up. So it's a fascinating question because the essence of both of what both of you are saying here is industry has reacted to the Snowden disclosures by basically saying we're no longer going to operate as American companies. We're going to operate as international companies and the world is demanding that we give you universal encryption and we're going to give it to them. You both sat at various times. Corey, you during the days after 9-11 through the beginning of these programs that started up that Snowden later revealed. Jeremy, you sat through the reauthorizations of several of them during the first term and these issues even came up when you were in the chief counsel's job at House Intelligence. In either case, can either of you remember a moment in which anybody stopped and said when this stuff gets revealed, we're going to lose complete control of the way U.S. industry deals with this. They will route right around us. Did that discussion ever happen? Well, yes, in some ways it did.  You said that industry's response has been we're not American companies. I just agree with that. First of all, there are many industries and different industries have taken different approaches. That's first and foremost. But second is I don't think those companies are saying we're not American. I think what they're saying is we are American. We're saying we're global. We're saying we're American companies with a global user base and in order to give confidence to those users, we need to do certain things. And oh, by the way, if we don't, someone else will, which is entirely an entirely reasonable commercial perspective. And the only question is do they cooperate with lawful, appropriate uses of government requests for information, which is what we're trying to fashion. But the reason I answered yesterday's question, Dave, is because when the FISA Amendments Act was passed in 2007-2008, we had this exact discussion it was had on the floor of the Congress, which is how can we work with, how can we in the government work with private industry including telecommunications companies and social media companies, internet companies to ensure that when there is an individual overseas, a non-American who's overseas and we want to collect that person's communications and they are a valid target that we have appropriate court review and we have congressional oversight. Understanding that customers may not like that, but the company's view was also we also don't want our systems to be used to traffic in terrorist communications or other nefarious activities. So I think the trade-offs were discussed. So I don't remember such a moment, but I also didn't work on intelligence issues so much as broad defense issues. So it may have happened and I just didn't see it. I do think that one of the biggest mistakes both the Bush and the Obama administration have made on counterterrorism issues is not explaining themselves to my mother and the rest of the American public because as I read the debate about the Snowden disclosures that the set of choices that the government made, it ought to have made a public case for why they were doing what they were doing. The government argued that we don't want to reveal anything about how we're doing this because that helps the bad guys. And that's true, but unless you build a broad base of support under your policies and I do believe a broad base of support can be built under these policies, you leave yourself open to suspicion that you were never going to tell us this and the government can't be trusted to do this. And I think that's what we have now reaped on a lot of these intelligence gathering programs. So let's take a few questions from all of you. We've got about 15 minutes. I think there are microphones around and so just wait for a mic to come. We'll start with you, sir. Lauren Hershey, semi-retired attorney. Thank you very much for your remarks. You covered all the big picture items. Talk to me a little bit, if you will, and share your insights on the Korean Peninsula situation and the fact that a senior intelligence officer went over there on what I thought was a fairly remarkable trip with fairly remarkable results. What do you see and why? Jeremy, I never remember you sending Leon Panetti in to go pull anybody out of North Korea. Jim Clapper can travel much more incognito. Well, I think it was, I mean, that mission in itself I think was probably sui generis and unique and incredibly important for the lives of those two individuals, those Americans, and my hat goes off to Director Clapper for pulling that off. The question really is, does it herald some breakthrough or change with Kim Jong-un? My own view is I tend to think not. But I do think the Korean Peninsula issues potentially are one of those sleeper topics where we've got 28,000 troops from the Peninsula. The regime has tested a nuclear weapon three times, principally duds, but still tests nonetheless. Every now and then try to launch what may be an ICBM or maybe a space vehicle and obviously they're developing this mobile missile technology. And this relationship with the South kind of goes through these horrendous cycles with provocation, accommodation. And so at any moment while we may be in a good period now, just wait, the clock will turn and we may find ourselves in a very sparky situation with a lot of US troops on the Peninsula. And that's really the one area of the world, David, as I look around where I can envision us potentially being involved in the most thing that resembles full spectrum conflict. Everywhere else, I just don't see it. But the Korean Peninsula is the one place where I can foresee a situation in which we have to be prepared for that. So I think it's a good point. We shouldn't have neglected it in our tour around the world. So for me... Cory, I'll ask you to pick that up. But in the 2006 campaign, your boss, President Bush, told me in an interview we did with him at that time, we will never tolerate a nuclear North Korea. Do you remember that moment? I do. And here we are. Here we are eight years later. Are we tolerating them? Yes. What I was going to say in answer to the Korean question actually is my answer to what you just posed as well, David, which is that for me the most interesting thing about what's going on in Korea is South Korea's realignment. Because I think the fact that we did nothing after three nuclear tests, we claimed we couldn't live with this and yet turns out we can live with this, collapsed South Korean confidence that we could solve this problem for them or were willing to put our interests in controlling North Korea ahead of other things we were interested in. And I think as a result, the South Koreans are taking a much more autonomous policymaking path. They're much more engaged with the Chinese about it. And that's new and that's different. The Japanese, I think, made a fundamentally different choice, which is that they cannot be secure without the closest possible alignment with the United States and that unless they have that alignment, they cannot strengthen their defenses in ways that both China and North Korea's behavior validate them doing. I just have to disagree with that, Corey, because I've been a sole with the Secretary of Defense and been in engagements where their senior leadership has visited Washington and we hosted them at the Pentagon and elsewhere. And all of our responses to the 2009 test, the 2013 test, to all the flare-ups over the sinking of the Cheonan and everything else were closely coordinated with the South across their two administrations. And I never heard one whisper that they were concerned that we were somehow going soft on North Korea. It just, that's not accurate. Right back here. Yeah. Mike's coming to you. David Sadney, formerly with the State and Defense Departments. At one time there was a philosophy perhaps honored too much in the breach that politics stopped at the water's edge and that we had a nonpartisan American foreign policy. American voters seemed to elect both Republicans and Democrats at different times. Is there any prospect for foreign policy, national security policy, to rise above partisan debates where every action by whichever president or party it is, is subject to partisan attack rather than a focus on American national interest? What a quaint concept. What do we think? It's a really good point. And I hope so, David. I really do. And part of this I think is, and this goes to how to convince Cory's mother on certain issues. And by that I think you mean obviously the average American watching these issues from afar is my sense is that people tend not to vote for president on issues as much as on attributes. That's something I learned from some of my political mentors. And to the extent that attribute, an attribute that every candidate will want to project is strong internationalism, protecting America's interests, if necessary by military force. But obviously we prefer other options first. That kind of basic approach of America protecting its interests and values in the world. I think you're going to hear that from every major presidential candidate. I do, as I noted, I think it will be interesting and probably the primaries of both parties will have some outlier, some stray voltage and some outlier discussions on that. And in some places it will be more intense than others. But I think at the end of the day, we will see two candidates emerge from the process who will articulate that line and hopefully govern in that mode. So I think I am your average American voter, like right in the absolute middle of the political distribution. At CSIS, yeah. And I am... That's because you were CSIS part of the campaign part. I'm kind of confused. I am thirsting for boring, competent, bipartisan governance. And I don't think I am atypical in that regard. In fact, my own read of the election results from a couple of weeks ago is that the big winners are people who actually... John Kasich in Ohio, for example, who didn't take sharp partisan edges to what they were doing. Instead, they said, here's what I think our problems are. Here's my proposed solution set. And I'm going to build cooperation with anyone who's either willing to support this or got a better idea. I think that is a political winner in 2014 and I think it's going to be a big political winner in 2016. I hope so. There was a young lady right there, yeah. Mike's coming to you. My name is Bai Jie. I'm a visiting fellow of CSIS. I'm from China. And I thank you for panelists to give us very informative remarks. My question is related to the regional cooperation, especially in economic areas. As my observation, and some interview with the expert in the United States, we found that the TPP and the TTIP is the priority of your trade agenda. Actually, I also learned something about, you know, it seemed that the United States is intentionally to avoid some regional cooperation or free trade negotiations initiated by China or dominated by China, so called. So my question is, you know, what's your view toward the future of free trade negotiations of the United States and how to balance the relations between the United States and China? Actually, this is my simple question. Yeah, thank you. Well, I think two important points in response to that question about free trade in Asia and our economic relationship with China, and I'll just keep this brief. Look, our economic interdependence with China has never been more important, both to our economic future and to our security future. At the same time, I think we do want to pursue free trade with a block of nations in Asia, in the TPP forum, that will, on a multilateral basis, lower tariffs and provide more opportunity for export of U.S. goods and services. So if China is willing to come into that regime, I think we would welcome it, and the only question is, will they, but without them saying that they will, I think it's on us to go forward and try to finalize the TPP. If I were the Chinese, the fact that they aren't included in the Trans-Pacific Partnership would actually validate my concerns about American policy being containment. So they're not crazy to think that. That said, the Chinese are actually doing America's work for us and strengthening our alliances in Asia. And I actually take the Chinese leader's set of choices, not just with President Obama but with the President of the Philippines and others over the course of the last several days as a realization by the Chinese government that they are actually building the coalition that will contain them by virtue of their sharp-edged choices about how to deal with maritime claims and things like that, and that they're smart enough to take a different tack. Okay. I think I have time for one or two more. There was a hand over here before, and I'm trying to see if I can see it again. No, nobody objects to a single thing said so far. Too much wisdom. David, there. Yes, sir. Doug Morrison, now an industry former joint staff planner and worked with Corey Shocke. If you could... And lived to survive in town. I'm still standing. We've heard a lot of different things, but I was wondering if each of you could kind of encapsulate N's ways, means, what's your strategy circa May 2017, and I'm going to draw a sharp distinction, what I would call now an ostrich strategy, which is instead of dealing with the world the way it really is, we look at it as we would like it to be or the way we think it ought to be, and when it comes to the military element of power, we have an RSVP approach, which is, I'll let you know when I get there. In Libya, I'm going to lead from behind. In Syria, I'm going to draw a red line on the Korean Peninsula, I'm not sure, and when it comes to ISIL, well, listen, we'll look around and we'll figure it out when we get there. So I am not going to envision, I'm not going to craft a policy based on how I wish the world was, because I feel like that's what the Obama Administration has been doing for the last six years, and it's not working out very well for us, but I will tell you what I think our strategy should be, which is the best American foreign policy is a strong, vibrant United States. So the President's not wrong that we have work to do at home, and we ought to do it with enthusiasm and good faith towards each other so that we build the common basis for bipartisanship overseas. Second, we ought to be unapologetic about the universality of our values, because we really do hold these truths to be self-evident, and not only are we a better place because of it, but other places are better because of it, and we are hesitant because we have done a bad job of advancing American values in the international order, and yet they still merit advancing, and it is still what most people want for themselves, and when we are a voice for our values and we align our policy with our values, they're not the same thing. Our interests and our values don't always go together, but finding policies that bring them as close together as possible actually is the best kind of American foreign policy in the world. Have the strongest, best-equipped, best-trained military in the world ready to respond to a crisis and to defend our interests wherever they are, to use military force if necessary. Second, to build the capacity of partners and allies around the world. We can't be everywhere, but we need our allies and friends to be so. And third is to make sure that we communicate and live up to our universal values and to ensure that other countries do as well. Well, I thank you very much. This has been a great conversation. Thank you, Corey. Thank you, Jeremy. Thank you all for participating, and we'll call it the rest of the afternoon.


Welcome to the transformational course level one and in this level we're going to show you how to activate that chi in your body activate the energy flow get the energy moving the fuel so that it powers your entire pyramid prosperity pyramid. So I'm going to share with you some internal qigong breathing meditation practices as well as some external tai chi and qigong movements that you can practice at home anytime anywhere that you want so that it can get that chi activated cultivate that chi and help it to grow inside of your body. So the most basic practice is breathing so this is the basis of all of the meditations and all of the tai chi and qigong practices that you will learn from this point on is proper breathing.


For the Circuit Python Parsec today, I wanted to talk about how to use tap detection inside of the Circuit Playground Library in Circuit Python. And I happen to be on a Circuit Playground Blufruit. The Circuit Playground Library is a really high-level library that makes things easy to do on either the Circuit Playground Express or the Circuit Playground Blufruit boards. Here I have the Blufruit version, but this would work the same in either case. What this function in the library lets me do is detect tapping of the entire board because we have an accelerometer built on there, the LIS3DH, which happens to have tap detection. And built into it, it can tap either a single tap or double taps, which is really convenient because it allows you to avoid accidental taps. If you have this, let's say, sewn into a costume or built into a prop and you want to start something without any real access to the board itself, you can tap onto the board, the object, the prop you've built it into. Here's an example of it working here. I've got a little red LED up in the corner here. You're going to see that turn on when I double tap. So I just double tapped the board. You see the LED went on, and now I'm going to turn it off again by double tapping. And that tap will work from pretty much any direction. We can tap on the front of it there, on the side of it, on the bottom of it. As long as it wiggles enough, actually, I'm kind of holding that a little tight so I didn't want to go. There we go. You can also see here I'm printing the double tapped when that happens. And we can change that tap to text to a single tap, and that would work just the same, but for single taps. The way this works in code is really straightforward. All I really need to do is import from Adafruit Circuit Playground, import CP. That brings in the whole Circuit Playground object. Then I'm going to use cp.detecttaps equals 2, so it tells this that I'm looking for two taps within a pretty short band. You can get away with a few milliseconds in between, maybe 40, 50, up to 100. But it is kind of like double tapping or double clicking on a mouse. Then in my main loop here, I have while true if cp.tapped, meaning did this double tap get registered, then I'm printing double tapped, and then I'm changing the red LED, again using the Circuit Playground library, cp.redled equals the opposite. So if it's off, it's on, if it's on, it's off. Then I'm waiting just a little bit there so we can avoid any sort of debouncing issues. And so that is how you can detect double taps on the Circuit Playground Express or Circuit Playground Blue Fruit in Circuit Python using the Circuit Playground library. And that is your Circuit Python Parsec.