Good morning everybody. Welcome. We're glad to have you here. Can't imagine that you all have this much free time, so there must be something going on today here. We're delighted to welcome John Brennan. This is actually a very, very important week. The administration is going to be releasing its national security strategy. And we get a chance to think about it a little bit in advance and start thinking through the issues that we know that the administration's been wrestling with. And we're fortunate to have John to help lead us through that. So first John, thank you. Thank you for taking the time to join us. You all know John Brennan. John's a long time civil servant. He's been helping this country with its security for 30 years. A long time with the Central Intelligence Agency. Rose to become the head of the National Counterterrorism Center. Really its founding director. And now of course serves as the assistant to the president for Homeland Security and for counterterrorism. And in that capacity, he is completely in the center of all things important right now. So we're delighted that he would be willing to take the time to join us. And we know it's going to be very interesting. I want to thank you for your service. The country needs you. And we're very grateful that you're willing to do this and join us today. We'll turn to you. Thank you. John Brennan, ladies. Thank you very much John. And I would like to take a moment to express my appreciation to CSIS for inviting me back. You invited me here. A little after six months I think when I came in to this administration and I greatly appreciate the invitation to return. I also want to extend a note of appreciation to John Hamry who I think last month celebrated your 10th anniversary here at CSIS. You truly are John one of the modern icons of public service. After so many years working for the government and continuing that tradition here at CSIS I think we all owe you a note of thanks for what you have done for the security of this country. So thank you very much John. As I said last summer I stood here a little over six months into President Obama's administration. At that time I outlined the emerging contours of the President's approach to meeting two related but distinct challenges. First the immediate near-term challenge of destroying al-Qaeda and its extremist affiliates. And second the longer-term challenge of confronting violent extremism generally including the political, economic and social forces that can sometimes put individuals on the path toward militancy. This approach is now being formalized as the President releases his national security strategy tomorrow. This strategy aims to renew American leadership in the 21st century by rebuilding the fundamental sources of American strength, security, prosperity and influence in the world. It reflects the positive vision of American leadership and partnership with other nations that President Obama has consistently articulated since taking office. It provides the intellectual framework for the national security policies and programs already being implemented. And it reflects the President's vision for confronting the most daunting challenges of our time while seizing the opportunities of an increasingly globalized world. The President's strategy is guided by national interests that are clear and enduring. First and foremost security. The security of the United States, its citizens and U.S. allies and partners is and always will be paramount. Prosperity, a strong, innovative and growing U.S. economy in an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity is essential to our future and the future of generations yet to come. Values, respect for universal values at home and around the world defines who we are and what we hold dear. And an international order that promotes peace, security and opportunity through stronger cooperation as this is the only path that will allow us to meet global challenges. This strategy lays out a clear path for advancing these interests and shaping the world we seek. As the President stated this weekend at West Point, we must build the sources of America's strength and influence and shape a world that's more peaceful and more prosperous. As the President explained, this includes rebuilding the foundation of American strength and prosperity at home. It includes comprehensive engagement with the world. It includes building and integrating the capabilities we need to succeed. Capabilities that span the military, diplomatic, development, intelligence, law enforcement and homeland security fronts. And it includes strengthening multilateral institutions and norms so that shared challenges can be met through collective action. Tomorrow, Secretary of State Clinton and the President's National Security Advisor, General Jones, will discuss how this strategy will advance our interests around the world. Today, as the President's Principal Advisor on Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, I want to address how this national security strategy is guiding our efforts to secure our homeland by renewing America's strength, resilience and values. The President's strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind. And as Americans, we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself of one's community.  Indeed, characterizing our adversaries this way would actually be counterproductive. It would play into the false perception that they are religious leaders defending a holy cause, when in fact they are nothing more than murderers, including the murder of thousands upon thousands of Muslims. This is why Muslim leaders around the world have spoken out forcefully and often at great risk to their own lives to reject al-Qaeda and violent extremism. And frankly, their condemnations often do not get the recognition they deserve, including from the media. Moreover, describing our enemy in religious terms would lend credence to the lie propagated by al-Qaeda and its affiliates to justify terrorism, that the United States is somehow at war against Islam. The reality, of course, is that we have never been and will never be at war with Islam. After all, Islam, like so many faiths, is part of America. Instead, the President's strategy is clear and precise. Our enemy is al-Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates. For it was al-Qaeda who attacked us so viciously on 9-11, and whose desire to attack the United States, our allies and our partners, remains undiminished. And it is its affiliates who have taken up al-Qaeda's call to arms against the United States and other parts of the world. The President's strategy is unequivocal with regard to our posture. The United States of America is at war. We are at war against al-Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates. That is why the President is responsibly ending the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9-11, and why he has refocused our efforts on Afghanistan where al-Qaeda continues to plot from the tribal regions along the border with Pakistan and inside of Pakistan. We have a clear mission. We will not simply degrade al-Qaeda's capabilities or simply prevent terrorist attacks against our country or citizens. We will not merely respond after the fact, after an attack that has been attempted. Instead, the United States will disrupt, dismantle and ensure a lasting defeat of al-Qaeda and violent extremist affiliates. And the President's strategy outlines how we will achieve this mission and keep Americans safe. We will deny al-Qaeda and its affiliates safe haven. We will secure the world's most dangerous weapons, especially the nuclear materials that al-Qaeda seeks and would surely use against us. We will build positive partnerships with Muslim communities around the world. And most importantly, we will protect our homeland. The President's strategy describes how this effort will require a broad, sustained and integrated campaign that harnesses every tool of American power, military and civilian, kinetic and diplomatic, and indeed the power of our values and partnerships with other nations and institutions. In other words, this is a multi-departmental, multinational, and indeed a multi-generational effort. To deny al-Qaeda and its affiliates safe haven, we will take the fight to al-Qaeda and its extremist affiliates wherever they plot and train. In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and beyond, we are not only delivering severe blows against the leadership of al-Qaeda and its affiliates, we are helping those governments build their capacity to provide for their own security, to help them root out the al-Qaeda cancer that has manifested itself within their borders, and to help them prevent it from returning. In all our efforts, we will exercise force prudently, recognizing that we often need to use a scalpel and not a hammer. When we know of terrorists who are plotting against us, we have a responsibility to take action to defend ourselves, and we will do so. At the same time, an action that eliminates a single terrorist but causes civilian casualties can in fact inflame local populations and create far more problems, a tactical success, but a strategic failure. So we need to ensure that our actions are more precise and more accurate than ever before. This is something that President Obama not only expects, but demands. Moreover, we know that al-Qaeda seeks to overextend the United States and drain us militarily, financially, and psychologically. I have seen this through my own experience covering al-Qaeda and terrorism over the past two decades, but we will not let that happen. We will always carefully weigh the costs and risks of action against the costs and risks of inaction, and whenever possible, we will join with allies and partners to share the burdens of our collective security. As a result of our actions, we have subjected the core of al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, to unprecedented pressure. In the last 16 months alone, hundreds of al-Qaeda fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed. We have inflicted significant damage on their capabilities. Today, it is harder than ever for this network to move, raise funds, recruit, train, and plot attacks, all of which makes the American people safer. These successes, though, have not come easily. They are a result of the service and sacrifices of men and women who risk their lives to protect ours in our intelligence, military, law enforcement, first responder, and homeland security communities. On many occasions, they have made the ultimate sacrifice, such as those seven CIA officers who gave their lives at a remote outpost in Afghanistan last December, and all those brave servicemen and women who give their lives on a daily basis in Afghanistan. So as a nation, let us always debate our counterterrorism efforts, but let us never forget or fail to support the extraordinary men and women who serve to keep us safe. The President's national security strategy also outlines how we will strengthen other tools of American power, which will help us meet many challenges. This includes addressing the political, economic, and social forces that can make some people fall victim to the cancer of violent extremism. Through a renewed commitment to diplomacy and in contrast to terrorists who offer the false hope of change through violence, we seek to show that legitimate grievances can be resolved peacefully through democratic institutions and dialogue, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or between Israelis and Palestinians, whether continuing conflict undermines moderates and strengthens extremists across the region. Through new partnerships to promote development in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, we are working to foster good governance, reduce corruption and improve education, health and basic services, all of which helps undermine the forces that can put the disillusioned and disposed on the path to militancy. And in all our efforts, the President's national security strategy makes clear that we must demonstrate and communicate America's vision of opportunity and progress, in contrast with the bankrupt and evil ideology of violent extremists who exploit the people they purport to serve. Communicating America's vision is what the President did in his speech nearly one year ago in Cairo, which has inspired new partnerships between the United States and Muslim communities around the world in development, education, health and science, and technology. And to secure our homeland, we will continue the never-ending work of strengthening our defenses here at home. In light of the failed attacks over Detroit and in Times Square, it is easy to forget but it bears repeating. Since 9-11, we have made enormous progress as a nation in securing our homeland. And under President Obama, we have built upon the work of the previous administration and have accelerated efforts in many areas. We have improved security at our borders, airports, and other ports of entry. We have strengthened intelligence, information sharing, and cooperation at all levels, federal, state, and local. And timely analysis of threat information, even as events over the past year highlight the need to do better.  Indeed, since January of last year, more than 20 individuals in the United States have been arrested and charged with terrorism crimes. They're plans and plots disrupted.  Each of these arrests represents the coordinated work of countless intelligence, homeland security, and law enforcement personnel who have saved countless American lives. But these success is notwithstanding. Indeed, perhaps because of them, it is clear that we are now facing a new phase of the terrorist threat. We have long recognized that al-Qaeda, its affiliates, and those who subscribe to its murderous ideology are resilient, resourceful, and determined enemy. We have made it harder for them to recruit and train, so they are increasingly relying on recruits with little training. We have strengthened our defenses against massive, sophisticated attacks in our homeland, so they are attempting attacks with little sophistication, but with very lethal intent. They are seeking foot soldiers who might slip past our defenses by defining the traditional profile of a terrorist, like Umar Farouk Abdul-Muttalib, the Nigerian behind the failed attack over Detroit. Knowing that the United States and our allies have strengthened aviation screening in recent years, they equipped Abdul-Muttalib with explosives sewn into his clothes that were less likely to be detected by a traditional metal detector. Knowing that it is harder to penetrate America's defenses, the likes of al-Qaeda's Adam Gadan and Anwar Aulaki in Yemen, American citizens who understand our society, our strengths, as well as our vulnerabilities, not only plan attacks, they use the internet and extremist websites to exhort people already living in the United States to take up arms and launch terrorist attacks from within. Indeed, we have seen an increasing number of individuals here in the United States become captivated by extremist ideologies or causes. Somali Americans from Minnesota traveling to fight in Somalia. The five Virginia men who went to Pakistan seeking terrorist training. David Headley, the Chicago man charged with helping to plan the Mumbai attacks. The Pennsylvania woman, Shahad Jain, charged with conspiring to murder a Danish cartoonist. The President's National Security Strategy explicitly recognizes the threat to the United States posed by individuals radicalized here at home. We have seen individuals, including U.S. citizens armed with their U.S. passports, travel easily to extremist safe havens, and return to America, their deadly plans disrupted by coordinated intelligence and law enforcement. Daniel Patrick, Board of North Carolina, who with others conspired to murder U.S. military personnel, and Najib al-Uzazi, who received his instruction in bomb making in Pakistan. Unfortunately, we were unable to thwart Faisal Shahad, accused of attempting to set off the car bomb in Times Square. We have also seen individuals, including American citizens, apparently inspired by al-Qaeda's ideology, take matters into their own hands. Again, we have disrupted a number of these plots, including individuals in Texas and Illinois charged with planning to blow up buildings. Tragically, we were unable to prevent others, the murder of a military recruiter in Arkansas last year, and the senseless slaughter of 13 innocent Americans at Fort Hood. I would note that it is telling that many of these individuals felt the need to hide their activities from their families and communities, likely because they knew they would be condemned by those very same communities. Indeed, in a number of these cases, it has been families and communities concerned for their loved ones who have brought these individuals to the attention of law enforcement. This is the new phase of the terrorist threat, no longer limited to coordinated, sophisticated 9-11 style attacks, but expanding to single individuals attempting to carry out relatively unsophisticated attacks. As our enemy adapts and evolves their tactics, so must we constantly adapt and evolve ours, not in a mad rush driven by fear, but in a thoughtful and reasoned way that enhances our security and further delegitimizes the actions of our enemy. To this end, a key theme of the President's national security strategy is how we will remain a strong and resilient nation here at home. As a strong and resilient nation, we will adapt. This is the first national security strategy of any president that integrates Homeland Security as part of a broader national security strategy. At the White House, we have already merged the staffs of the National Security Council, Homeland Security Council, and parts of the National Economic Council into a single integrated national security staff that includes new offices, including cybersecurity. This has fostered a more rapid, coordinated and effective federal response to the range of challenges we face, from the failed attacks in Detroit and Times Square, to H1N1, to the earthquake in Haiti, and to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. To ensure we are constantly adapting and improving, and to address any deficiencies or weaknesses in the system, the President has ordered immediate reviews and corrective actions in the immediate aftermath of attempted attacks. Since the attack at Fort Hood, we have taken numerous steps, including improving communication between the Department of Events and Justice regarding disaffected individuals in our armed forces. Following the failed attack over Detroit, we have strengthened the analysis and integration of intelligence and have enhanced aviation security, including a new, real-time threat-based screening policy for all international flights to the United States. And as the investigation into the Times Square plot continues, so will our constant effort to assess and bolster our defenses. As a strong and resilient nation, we will prepare. Building on the unprecedented investments we have already made in Homeland Security, we will continue to reduce our vulnerabilities. We will work with allies and partners to constantly enhance security at our borders, airports, and ports. We will move forward with our new initiative to respond faster to bioterrorism. We will work with the private sector to enhance the security of our critical infrastructure, including cyberspace, which underpins our economy, our society, and our security. Even as we do everything in our government to prevent attacks, we recognize the indispensable role played by ordinary citizens. We have seen this before. In the heroic passengers aboard Flight 93 on 9-11, who saved countless lives on the ground in Washington. The response personnel who prevented even more lives from being lost at Fort Hood. The passengers who restrained Abu Matala on Flight 253 over Detroit. And the street vendors in Times Square who alerted the police when they saw something suspicious. This is the kind of vigilance that can keep us safe. As a strong and resilient nation, we will strengthen our ability to withstand any disruption, whatever the cause. For even as we put unrelenting pressure on the enemy, even as we strive to thwart 100% of the plots against us, we know that terrorists are striving to succeed only once. And we must be honest with ourselves. No nation, no matter how powerful, can prevent every threat from coming to fruition. And in America, a free and open society of 300 million people, the task becomes even more difficult as our adversaries increasingly rely on individual terrorists and lone individuals inspired by Al-Qaeda's hateful ideology. But rather than a reason to fear, this must be a catalyst for action. Instead of simply resigning ourselves to what appears to some to be the inevitable, we must improve our preparedness and plan for all contingencies. Instead of simply building defensive walls, we must bolster our ability at all levels, federal, state, local and the private sector, to withstand disruptions, maintain operations and recover quickly. Instead of giving into fear and paralysis, which is the goal of terrorists, we must resolve as a nation, as a people, that we will go forward with confidence, that we will resist subcoming to overreaction, especially to failed attacks, and not magnify these perpetrators beyond the despicable miscreants that they are.  As the President said at West Point, we must remember who we are. We are Americans who have overcome great challenges before and will do so again and again and again. This leads to the final way we can remain a strong and resilient nation. By staying true to who we are as a people, including the values that remain one of the greatest sources of our strength at home and abroad. The President's National Security Strategy speaks to this directly. More than any other action we have taken, the power of America's example has spread freedom and democracy worldwide. That is why we must always seek to uphold these values, not just when it is easy, but also when it is hard. Indeed, fidelity to our values and to end practices that were counterproductive to our counterterrorism efforts is why the President banned brutal methods of interrogation. Fidelity to our values and to deny violent extremists one of their most potent recruitment tools is why the President ordered that the prison at Guantanamo Bay be closed and that we bring detainees to justice. As we work to close that prison, including any transfers or release of detainees, we will be guided by one priority above all others, the security of the American people. And we must not forget what military leaders and national security experts from across the political spectrum have said for years that the detention facility at Guantanamo has served as a powerful recruiting tool for our enemies and must be closed. Going forward, our challenge is to find policies that are consistent with both the rule of law and our values as a nation that allow us to optimize both our security and our liberties, that give us the maximum flexibility to collect intelligence and protect the American people and keep us one step ahead of the evolving threats to our nation. Fortunately, we can do all this because we have the strongest, most effective legal system in the world. Nonetheless, we are constantly working to strengthen existing tools and capabilities to develop new ones, consistent with our constitutional and legal obligations that will further empower our counterterrorism professionals to protect the American people. For example, we have created an interagency team called the High Value Detainee Interrogation Group that we deploy overseas as well as domestically to gather valuable intelligence from terrorist suspects, like Zazi, Al-Mutallab and Shazad. We do this as rapidly as possible and in accordance with the law. We're also working to develop an effective and durable legal framework for the war against al-Qaeda. Effective by providing our counterterrorism professionals with the tools they need to prevent terrorist suspects from threatening us again. Endurable, able to withstand legal challenge in our courts as well as to have the support of both political parties so that it can be sustained in future administrations. We continue to work with the Congress on such a framework, but its broad elements are clear, as is the need for flexibility so we can apply the right tools in the right circumstances. Such a framework must include perhaps our single most effective tool for prosecuting, convicting and sentencing suspected terrorists, our Article III courts. Since 9-11, prosecutions in our federal courts have resulted in hundreds of convictions of terrorists, including life sentences for the likes of Zakarias Mosawi, the so-called 20th 9-11 hijacker, as well as the shoe bomber Richard Reid. In addition, the federal criminal justice system has enabled us to disrupt ongoing plots, and as recent cases have demonstrated, prosecuting suspects in federal courts does not impede intelligence collection. To the contrary, our federal criminal justice system has proven to be an effective intelligence collection tool, helping the government to obtain information about the plans, intentions, tactics, recruitment, training and organizational structures of terrorist organization, including al-Qaeda and its affiliates. Just as we cannot cast aside our federal courts because we are at war, we must also recognize that there are other options for bringing terrorists to justice, including military commissions. Last year, we worked with Congress to reform and strengthen these commissions, restoring their legitimacy as an appropriate venue for trying terrorist suspects and turning those commissions into an effective tool. We have announced plans to try several individuals by these reform commissions, even as we remain mindful that commissions are not without limitations that circumscribe the instances in which they can be used. As such, commissions should remain one of the tools of any framework, but is to be used as needed and as appropriate. A durable and effective legal framework must also recognize that some detainees currently in our custody at Guantanamo cannot be released because they pose a grave threat to the United States, but for a variety of reasons they also cannot be prosecuted. This is, as the President has said, the toughest issue we face. So we continue to work to ensure that any prolonged detention includes fair procedures, periodic review, and is subject to constitutional checks and balances. Finally, remaining faithful to our values requires something else, that we never surrender the diversity and tolerance and openness to different cultures and faiths that define us as Americans. Several months ago, I had the opportunity to speak at NYU, where I was hosted by the University's Islamic Center and the Islamic Law Students Association. The audience included people of many faiths, Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu and Sikh. I was there to have a dialogue on how as Americans we can all work together to keep our country safe from the terrorists who seek to drive us apart. After I was finished speaking, person after person stood up to share their perspective and to ask their questions. Mothers and fathers, religious leaders and students, recent immigrants and American citizens by birth. One after another they spoke of how they love this country and of all the opportunities it has afforded them and their families. But they also spoke of their concerns that their fellow Americans, and at times their own government, may see them as a threat to American security rather than part of the American family.  This is the challenge we face. Even more than the attacks that Al Qaeda and his violent affiliates unleash or the blood they spill, they seek to strike at the very essence of who we are as Americans. By replacing our hard won confidence with fear and replacing our tolerance with suspicion. By turning our great diversity from a source of strength into a source of division. By causing us to undermine the laws and values that have been a source of our strength and our influence throughout the world. By turning a nation whose global leadership has meant greater security and prosperity for people in every corner of the globe into a nation that retreats from the world stage and abandons allies and partners. That is what Al Qaeda and its allies want. To achieve their goals by turning us into something that we are not. But that is something they can never achieve because only the people of America can change who we are as a nation. Al Qaeda can sow explosives into their clothes or park in SUV with explosives on a busy street, but it is our choice to react with panic or resolve. They can seek to recruit people already living among us, but it is our choice to subject entire communities to suspicion or to support those communities in reaching the disaffected before they turn to violence. Terrorists may try to bring death to our cities, but it is our choice to either uphold the rule of law or chip away at it. They may strike our communities, but it is our choice to either respond wisely and effectively or lash out in ways that inflame entire regions and stoke the fires of the violent extremism. And that is our choice. And with the strategy we are releasing tomorrow, President Obama and the administration offers our answer. We will defeat Al Qaeda and its affiliates. We will build a strong and resilient nation. And we will remain faithful to our values that make us Americans. That is how we will prevail in this fight. That is how we will keep our country safe. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to talk to you this morning. Thank you. Well, Mr. Bryan, thank you very much for those remarks. And of course, as John Henry said, it's an honor to have you here. And it's a privilege for the President and you to unveil these parts of the security strategy here at CSIS. We're now going to go into the question and answer period. I get to have a little bit of an iron fist here. This will be a question and answer period, not a statement and answer period. So please keep your microphones around the room. When you get a microphone, first raise your hand. When a microphone comes to you, please state your name, your affiliation, if you have one. And then please provide us a sync question. And Mr. Brennan will go ahead and answer it from there. So we'll go ahead and kick it off. We'll start right here in the front. Thank you very much. Catherine Harris, Fox News Channel. Mr. Brennan, who do you consider the greater threat today? Osama bin Laden or the American cleric, Anwar Alalaki? I think they both present a threat to American security in different ways. Osama bin Laden, who has built up al-Qaeda over the past two decades, is the titular head of that organization. And he is representative of the violence and the murderous agenda that al-Qaeda holds. Clearly, the al-Qaeda organization at large is something that we are continuing to pound and to use all of our tools against. But individuals like Anwar Alalaki, who recently released a video, demonstrated that his rhetoric is anything but peaceful. It's anything but Islamic. It is dedicated to murder and lashing out. So they both have the ability to inspire and to try to prey on those victims who believe that they are true Muslims, but they're anything but. I'm saying that they both represent a threat in different ways. Mr. Alalaki is in Yemen. We know that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula poses a serious threat in the peninsula, as well as abroad. We know of his involvement in exhortations to individuals to carry out attacks. So to me, they're both dangers. They're both threats, and we will address them appropriately. Very great. Thank you. Let's go to the gentleman here in the gray suit, the beard. Thank you. Spencer Ackerman with The Washington Independent. What would you say to those who would say that you've already compromised American values by pursuing indefinite detention without charge? When this administration came in in January of last year, we dealt with a number of legacy situations that we wanted to make sure that we were able to deal with appropriately without compromising the security of the American people. I think as everybody recognizes on both sides of the political spectrum that the situation in Guantanamo is a very, very difficult and challenging one. And I think as even though the President said that he was determined to close Guantanamo within one year, it still remains open because the President is determined not to do anything that would compromise America's security. It is something that we are working very closely with the Congress on. We're trying to do things in a very thoughtful manner. We have transferred about 50 of those detainees over the past year and a half, and we're continuing to look at their situations there. But this is a challenge that we need to look at from a policy perspective, from a legal perspective, as well as from a security perspective. I'm going to try to go back and forth over here in the front row. Some of you might have to navigate around the podium to... Hello. My name is Kiri Lemak with Global Survivors Network. In the late of last week's Intel Committee Report and on the 9-11 Commission Chairs, Cain and Hamilton's testimony about the adequacy of the support from the President and the Administration for the DNI. How do you plan to go about selecting a new DNI and do you believe that you're going to be able to have an Administration give the support for that person to be able to adequately perform the duties and be able to coordinate across Intel communities? The DNI Structure Now has been in place for five years. There have been three individuals who have, I think, performed very well in those positions. What we're doing right now is ensuring that we're able to optimize the contribution of the Office of the DNI. We believe that it is critically important to make sure that the 16 organizations or so that make up the Intel community are going to be integrated well and orchestrated well, and that's what the DNI's role is. We're confident that we're going to be able to do this in the future going forward. Danny Blair is a true public servant for this country and he did a great job. And what we need to do now is to go forward and to build upon the progress that he has made. But this is something that President Obama and the Administration is taking very seriously. There's no diminishment of the importance of intelligence for this Administration and we want to make sure that the DNI's role is clear and it's able to optimize the contributions that the Intel's community makes on a daily basis. I'll just stay down here if you want. You want to go in the front row over here? Thank you very much. I'm Josh Rogan, Foreign Policy Magazine. You talked a little bit about the changes in the national security bureaucracy that the Administration is already making. I'm wondering if there are any new changes that will be required as part of the document you're releasing tomorrow or is this just a summary of the changes that you already have planned and ongoing? And secondly, you didn't mention democracy or human rights promotion as part of the national security strategy. And of course this was a major pillar of the previous national security strategy. I'm wondering if you could talk about why this Administration seems to be deprioritizing those goals. My portfolio at the White House is counter-terrorism and homeland security and what I was trying to do today is to hurl some of those key themes that are going to be coming out in that national security strategy that will be released tomorrow. Secretary Clinton will be addressing a number of those international dimensions that you point out and I don't want to take away any of the thunder that is coming out of that. This document embodies that which has been part and parcel of this Administration's policies here to fore and it also lays out the vision of where we're going in the future. So it's a combination of taking stock of what we have done and where we're going and the challenges that we yet face. But there'll be other parts of the strategy that will address those issues that you raise. Let's go back in the middle with the pink shirt. Sorry, peach shirt. Mr. Preble. It's Sam and Chris Preble with the Kato Institute. Sir, you mentioned in terms of law enforcement, you mentioned in terms of homeland security, what role does communication play in building a resilient society? Do you have a communication strategy with respect to terrorism or even if not a public strategy do you have best practices or terms or a way of talking about terrorism in the speeches that you give and the other speeches the Administration gives on terrorism? I think what we've tried to do over the past 16 months or so is to be very precise and careful in the terminology that we use. That's part of the content of the communications that we're trying to put forth. But there also is a comprehensive communication strategy to deal with issues like violent extremism and that we're trying to do that not just internationally as evidenced by the President's speech in Cairo but also engaging with the different departments and agencies here and engaging with the local communities so that we have that outreach. So there is a communication strategy. It deals with content. It also deals with how we are communicating and interacting with these different elements. What I don't like to do is to just address the terrorism dimension of it because terrorism is just part of this continuum of radicalization, extremism and terrorism. What we need to make sure is that we're able to address those upstream factors and conditions and influences that can lead to terrorism. So it is comprehensive and more of it is going to be laid out in this National Security Strategy that comes out tomorrow. That's sort of the lady in the back in the green shirt, please. Lee Dozier with the Associated Press. Sir, the administration has acknowledged over the past year that there's been a doubling in drone strikes. It's also acknowledged the difficulties in closing Gitmo. Some of your critics say it seems it's become easier to kill terrorist suspects than to capture them and deal with the consequences afterward. How do you answer that? I think as I try to explain in my remarks, what we need to do is to utilize all the tools that are available to us to keep the American people safe. Sometimes that requires us to be very proactive and to utilize the power that we have as a country, military and otherwise, so that we can strike those terrorists where they are hiding, where they're plotting and training to prevent them from getting into a system that will bring them here to the homeland. At other times, though, it deals with capacity building of other countries that we have partnered with. It also is enhancing our defenses here at home. I think we have captured a lot of terrorists over the last year, not just those that we've arrested here in the United States, but those that we have captured with the assistance and in partnership with other nations. So I know that the media likes to highlight some of the reports that are coming out regarding kinetic strikes, but that is just one dimension. It is multi-dimensional, and I feel as though it's a robust and comprehensive program. If you care to share the numbers, I'm sure we'd all be willing to write it down.  This is where the moderator steps in. Arno, do you have a question? I'll go to the boy grab CSIS. Mr. Brennan, I think we would agree that Pakistan is a major non-NATO ally, but as the New York Times reminded us this morning, it is also a country to the conspiracy theory born, and most people, even at a very high level, believe that 9-11 was a CIA Mossad conspiracy. It's not a joke. We know that it goes to a very high level in that country, and I was wondering what can be done to counter that? Well, I think conspiracy theories and hyperbole and misrepresentation of the facts is something that is not the domain of any single country. We see that, including in our country, mischaracterizations of the facts. It's unfortunate that a lot of individuals are prone to believing in those conspiracy theorists. There's the freedom of the press and speech, and unfortunately, a lot of those types of speech are highlighted in the media, and it is quite unfortunate that they're given more, I think, attention than they deserve. We are working with the highest levels, as well as other levels of the governments abroad, but it's not just government-to-government interaction. That's why it's so important to emphasize the building up of those educational systems abroad, so they're not prone to hearing these types of views that are far removed from reality, and we know that there are textbooks in different parts of the world that at a very early age, the individual's view of the world is conditioned by those textbooks, and this is something that we're trying to address, so it really is multi-generational as well as multi-dimensional, and we have to interact with our partners, but at the same time, we have to think about the generations who are growing up in an environment where those conspiracy theories abound, and that's why it's so important that we have this public communications strategy in a very proactive and aggressive way to let people know that America is not trying to take over the world. We're not an imperialist power. We're not trying to militarize our relationships with these countries. The United States has long been seen as the beacon of democracy and help, and what we need to do is to make sure that we emphasize that so that those individuals who are prone to those theorists are going to have a better opportunity to learn about the real world. I'm going to go to the gentleman behind our note. I'm going to go to a question over here, John McAffin, CSIS. Mr. Brennan, does the word counterintelligence appear in your new national intelligence strategy? If so, how do you see it in that, and how does it fit in more broadly with your whole portfolio at the White House? Counterintelligence permeates my portfolio from a homeland security and a counter in perspective, and it does that both in the United States and in the United States, and it does that both in a strategic and in a tactical sense, that we need to make sure that we are very mindful of what it is that's going to allow us to stop these attacks from taking place and to make our country strong and safe. And we know that there are active efforts, not just by the nation states, that we have traditionally tried to guard against, but also by those who are trying to gain information as a way to identify vulnerabilities, and we have to be mindful of that. This is something that is clearly embedded in this administration. I know you have worked long and hard in making sure that we're ever mindful of that because sometimes those counterintelligence challenges we face are sub-rosa and are not at the top of our inbox. And this is where I think the people who are working at the National Counterintelligence Executive, as well as the DNI, has been a very strong proponent of that, FBI as well. Counterintelligence is something that I think has the challenges have changed over time, and I think our counterintelligence establishment needs to adapt as well, because we're not facing the traditional Cold War counterintelligence challenge. We're facing a much more sort of multi-headed beast that is out there. Okay, on this side of the room, Eric, did you want to go? Eric Schmidt with The New York Times. Mr. Brennan, the Zazi case and the Shazad case have exposed vulnerabilities in how potential terrorists operate within the United States. To what extent do you believe you need the liberties to conduct domestic surveillance to identify and target these kind of threats? What we've tried to do is to make sure that we balance appropriately the need for security, but also recognition of the civil liberties and privacy rights that make this country great. What we've tried to do is to increase our intelligence collection capabilities, particularly overseas, because both Shazad and Najib al-Zazi obtained training at those training camps in Pakistan. And so what we need to do is to try to modulate those intelligence collection capabilities that we might be able to pick that up. There is quite a bit of flow back and forth from other parts of the world to our country, especially challenging is when people have U.S. passports, a U.S. residency that allows them to travel back and forth. What we've tried to do also is to calibrate our system for watch listing. The President ordered immediate reviews afterward to highlight different traits not based on profiling, but based on sometimes travel patterns, other types of things, indicators that might raise up to the surface those individuals that have been operating under the radar. It is challenging here in the United States. We are a country of 300 million people. We have certain liberties and freedoms that we hold dear. So how can we raise up our ability to detect those individuals who are operating sometimes alone or with a small group of cohorts and are using the protections and the liberties of this country? And I think this is something that is worthwhile of debate. What else do we need to do as a country that will enhance our security, but at the same time hold true to those values that we cherish? It is a challenge. Go to the gentleman in the gray suit in the middle here, then we'll go over to the side of the room. Thank you. I'm Reggie Dell from CSIS. You twice spoke of the political, economic, and social forces that drive people to terrorism. And I'm wondering if that isn't a somewhat incomplete description. Are there not also religious, theological, ideological, you spoke of Al Qaeda's ideology and even psychological forces that drive people to terrorism? There are many, many, and that was just a sampling of some of those factors. But you're absolutely right. There are educational, there are cultural, there are some that purport to be religious. There are very disturbing views that are espoused and perpetuated in certain environments that I think we need to take stock of. I think we need to do more work on the behavioral science side. What is it that will actually drive somebody who has a family, who has a job to carry out an attack designed to kill many as well as themselves? And I think there is more work that we need to do to understand the psychology behind terrorism. But a lot of times the psychology is affected by the environment that has those political, social, economic factors that contribute to that. So the counterterrorism community has developed significantly since 9-11. There are a number of elements within the intelligence, law enforcement, homeland security communities that are looking at this phenomenon. And there's no single cause for terrorism. There's no single profile for a terrorist.  So what we need to do is to try to dissect it and not have a single prism that we look at terrorists through. We need to understand its multi-dimensional nature. But you're absolutely right. I agree with you. Okay, let's go a question over here. You already have one in the back in the white shirt, please. Sorry, the lady in the back. Sorry, with the pink shirt. Better rise than I have. Mina Al Arabian with the Shirkalosa newspaper. I'd like to ask you about Iraq. You mentioned that you're withdrawing responsibly from Iraq that the events in Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. However, there are Al-Qaeda members or at least networks that say they are affiliated to Al-Qaeda. Do you see them as posing no threat that the effort is to withdraw responsibly from Iraq and that this is an internal domestic matter, or how do you assess the threat from Al-Qaeda in Iraq? Thank you. Al-Qaeda in Iraq poses a serious threat. We have been able to have a number of successes against them, their leadership over the past couple of months. We're continuing to work with our Iraqi partners to degrade them. Al-Qaeda in Iraq bloomed in the aftermath of the fall of Saddam Hussein. It was able to take advantage of some of the political vacuums that took place there. We know that they are named Al-Qaeda in Iraq. They have a relationship with the broader Al-Qaeda family. This is something that we need to continue to work against. It does pose a threat, but we've been very pleased with the Iraqi security forces and how well they've been able to take the lead on prosecuting this effort against the terrorists in Iraq. It is something that we need to stay on top of. That's one of the things that we need to make sure that we don't do is to fall into a state of complacency, whether it be in Iraq or in the United States or other places. This is something that continues to crop up and even though we have made tremendous progress, they are continuing to be determined to carry out attacks both against the United States as well as against those governments such as Iraq that are trying to keep their people safe. This will be the final question, the lady in the back in the white dress. Yep, take care. Seema Ahmad with the Open Society Institute. Mr. Brennan, I'm really heartened by the government's change in terms of the language usage of Jihadist and Islamist and was similarly heartened by your talk at NYU in February. I'm wondering if there's been any thought about rethinking frankly the usage of the words terrorism and terrorist, which at present seem to be defined by the government and the media as acts of violence exclusively perpetuated by Muslims. We have tried to expand the framework when we talk about terrorism and counter-terrorism efforts to include the concern we have about violent extremism which is a more encompassing term in many respects. Unfortunately a number of these terms have become just part of our lexicon in the United States. What we can't do though is just to leave it at that one single term. We have to make sure that we understand what we are talking about because the terrorists that are operating in Pakistan are different than terrorists that are operating in the Sahel in Africa and from places in Southeast Asia. There are common traits, there are traits that they use but sometimes the forces that fuel them are radically different and we know that there are forces, political forces, local political factors that can contribute to the use of violence to achieve political objectives. What we need to do is to understand those forces. Some of them can be addressed through political dialogue. There was the extensive use of terrorism in the north of Ireland. It was something that could be addressed and we've been able to succeed as far as bringing that conflict to a halt and to have them engage in a dialogue and political participation. However, Al Qaeda what is being perpetuated and propagated by bin Laden is not to build up something, it really is just to pull it down. To me that embodies the epitomizes the terrorist challenge that we face that can be in some respects existential in some areas because they really are trying to just destroy our way of life, our people, our economy and that's where we have to be particularly resilient. But I think in some of these other areas we have to understand some of the dynamics that are at play. The PLO for many years used terrorism to try to advance their agenda. It was only when they set it aside that they were able to deal with some of these issues that underlie those problems in a very rational manner. For Al Qaeda though, there is no negotiating with them. We're not going to negotiate with Al Qaeda. We're going to destroy that organization. It's going to take time, but we're determined to do it. But there are other elements throughout the world that are using terrorism and violence to achieve local political objectives and I think we as a country need to look very carefully at those and to work with the governments and to understand the phenomenon better so we can find a way to end it and so that those local problems and grievances are not prone then to being exploited by Al Qaeda. Because that's what they try to do is to go after those opportunities. Well that's great. Before we thank Mr. Brennan, please everyone needs to remain seated for Mr. Brennan this party to part. That's important. Mr. Brennan, thank you very much for your time and for the remarks and for sharing that with you. We really appreciate it.


What's going on? Y'all know what time it is. It's book review time. Boom, boom, boom. Oh, with the body roll. How are you doing today? Welcome to Conversations with Kerry. Y'all, when I tell you, I have not read a book, brand plans, to be honest, in 2020, to read all the books. You can go back to my channel and see. I'll even list it below. All the books I plan to read. They were all great looking books. Girl, you know 2020 happened. Okay. And 2021 was a continuation. And Lord in the name of Jesus, I refuse to let 2022 to be another continuation. Okay. So I had your girls been reading and I'm pretty proud of myself. So I read read three books. So we're going to do a book review about three books. And for some relationship focus, your girl out here is single in the mug. So I don't, I don't know what got into me. But no, I know what got into me. I wanted to read really simple stuff because like work, outside life, everything else had me kind of like, you know, shoulders all the way up by your ears. And I had to like, relax, relate, release. That was my different world plug there. If you don't remember, some of y'all too young to know about different world. But anyway, I wanted to just read really simple books. So I did. First book I read was the cactus by Sarah Haywood. This was recommended from a book club member of mine. And she was just like, it's one of her favorites. To be honest, I don't know why it says even the prickliest cactus has its flower. So I will say the storyline in this book was good. It was about basically, if you've read Eleanor Olenfonte is completely fine. Imagine that character kind of imagine if that character was pregnant and having a baby, what she would be like. So I feel like this the main character, maybe kind of an odd character. And she, you know, says what's on her mind, very literal, but thinks everybody else is the problem when actually is actually her. But anyway, she's pregnant. She had an arrangement, which I won't give everything away in the book. And in the beginning, you don't know if she's sick or like going through like a major health issue or what big either way goes, her mother dies and her and her brother have this like major feud. And in while this is going on, she's also pregnant. She's been known to be like a kind of a cold standoffish kind of woman. She's pregnant through an arrangement that I'll let you read more about. And then let me also say this was a Reese's book club also. That's another reason why I was willing to read it. But anyway, so she gets pregnant, she has this whole thing and she has her mother dies, her and her brother in a feud about it. You know, she ends up falling for somebody. I don't want to give everything away. I'm somebody who loves a good spoiler alert, but I won't do that to you because you might be interested in going to read this. So again, I really like the storyline of it. If you're looking for like, I just want to zone out, maybe you got a little personal vacay coming up or something. This will do it.  Like, I don't know. So think about things to think about. Now these other two books are black love stories. I'm sure y'all have seen a lot of stuff about this. And let me say this, Jasmine Guillory, I think that's how you pronounce her last name. I support black authors.  Come on. As y'all know, I write over on carrylee.com so feel free to go over there. And so therefore I never want to just like say something negative about another female, especially black author. So I'll say this, these two books, The Wedding Date, which is the first one and the proposal.  They are romantic books, which I don't really, again, this ain't where I'm at in life, so I don't read this kind of stuff. So again, I will say, if you are like feeling extra lovey-dovey and like, oh my gosh romance is in the air, that's just not where I'm at. I'm kind of like a real kind of sister get on for a date, but that's me. That's me. But also just the storyline, they're very quick reads. I think I read, I read The Wedding Date on a Flight home. And I read this, I think it to maybe took me three days, three nights, just like picking it up and randomly reading it before bed. So I think the question is, would I recommend? I will personally say no, I don't recommend not because they're not good at writing. Like, again, it's just, it's just not where I'm at. Do I feel like they're like fast paced. You actually like get to like the character. I love that is black women who have falling for men of other ethnicities, which I think that's very realistic is in the Bay Area in LA. Hello, two places I've lived. So again, there's a lot to relate to. So let me say this, it's not that I don't recommend it. I just feel like if this is not where you're at in life, you're not going to enjoy it or maybe appreciate it for what it's for. But if you are trying to escape, and if you got like time to kill, like I said, knock this out in the flight. Girl, do you boo? This might be just right for you. It just wasn't necessarily just right for me. But again, I'm all about supporting black authors and we need more black women in the romance space. I don't know if y'all remember Zayn and stuff. That ain't romance. Like that's porn. I'm not the best, not what I'm about. So I felt like it was just, again, it was like a Hallmark movie. You knew exactly what was going to happen. But it was sweet.  It was real cute. So thank you so much for joining me with Conversations with Carrie. I know it's been so long since I've done a book review, but I appreciate you hanging in there to hear about these these books that, you know, they were entertainment for the time when you're trying not to watch as much TV. So I hope you're hanging in there. Hope you're doing well. And I would love to hear about some books that you're reading. So let me know down below what's been catching your eye. And hopefully you've gone over to Carrielead.com and you can do some reading there. Be sure to like and subscribe, check your girl out, and let's stay connected. Take care.


Hey guys, how are you? We are going to do some work here on some watercolor As of yet, I don't know what I'm going to name this But I'm assuming if you're watching this then you already know because it's in the title I did one of these recently where the One here on YouTube was a speed through for the most part and the tutorial was over on patreon. This one's going to be a full Tutorial, it's not going to be heavy in-depth tutorial, but it will be a full tutorial So we're going to do something quick and simple I'm going to start with colored pencil, and I'm just looking for a color Maybe don't want to do pink. I have these mechanical colored pencils that I got on Amazon They're by pilot and they're called color Eno I think I'm going to do pink. I Think we'll do pink. We're going to just do some simple flower shapes. Nothing complicated So we're mixed media artists, right?  I'm just making some round shapes I have taped off the edges of my journal just because I'm really enjoying right now Having sort of crisp edges to my paintings for the most part I Don't know if it's necessary for this particular one, but I had the tape. It was out. So we're going to use it All right, so we've got our simple shapes there. Can you see that? we're going to start with I think this time I'm going to start with a round brush and Always I always start lighter and work my way darker I think I'm going to start with whole lines permanent yellow orange, which in this palette is the only orange in the palette and This is my floral and cobalt palette. These are the colors in the You can't see that hang on Let's move this all down a little bit. There we go These are the colors in that palette if you want to take a screenshot right about here I'm going to figure out where my son is coming from maybe there because my studio studio light is that way So maybe I'll choose that it's coming from that way Which it kind of is anyway And I'm going to put the orange our tips Or bud tip, whatever these are. I don't know what these are Then we'll grab some water after we get some paint on there and blend out our inner edges a little bit Spread the paint around Okay, I'm going to do the same thing with a light green. So I have this light Jane Davenport green It's a limey green. It's called Jiminy And I want to make it a little bit lighter and less pigmented. So I'm going to add some water I'm going to do the same thing to our leaves. I'm not concerned about the pencil lines Staying on the page. I think things like that add interest to your work And interesting marks to your work, especially in something like this watercolor journal. So Don't be afraid to leave your pencil lines leave your marks and Let them add to the voice of your finished work Okay, that's pretty good. I like that I do have a dryer here handy off that way in case I need to I want to dry things between layers And I don't want colors to blend together too much Right now. I'm not feeling the need to do that, but you never know. I'm going to go into it the darkest red here It's called Frida. It's like a pinky red But it's pretty dark. The water is getting really dirty. This is like my third watercolor tutorial today All right, I'm going to add this to the bottom We're going to do as we did before and we're going to add some water It's going to blend up into the orange Because the orange for the most part is still wet Which I'm okay with and where I need it. I will add some more the red Such a pretty color. I'm working wet on wet in these little flowers. So the colors Bleed some of the pigment will stay where I put it but some of it's going to blend up into the other colors Which is what I want Okay, I'm going to do that something similar with the Leaves and the stems. So I am going to And I might need to add my light green back now because if I turn my head a little bit some of it's dry, but that's okay We are going to start with there's a cobalt green here, which is pretty dark Might not be dark enough But I have a darker green Sorry about all the background noise. My daughter is Also working from home, and I think she's trying to let the dog out I'm going to try to stay away from the orange because I don't want the green to go into the orange Which is a little bit tricky. I could dry it and make my life easier, but you know Okay, so we're going to go back with some water Putting the water where you want the paint to go. Don't put the water Into that orange because you don't want the paint to go there barely touching the paper with my brush Using just the very tip. I get too much on there. I can wash my brush off and lift Okay, I have a darker green here, which is Jane Davenport water spirit It's a dark olivey green. I'm going to mix it with some of the other with all of the other greens here I don't know if it's even dark enough. I might want to add some blue to it I think I'm going to add some of the Jane Davenport ink to it, which is a dark navy blue Yeah, that's better Okay, again, I'm just Barely touching Okay, my battery cut out there. So I don't know what you saw but I added our cobalt green and then blended it out with some water. Then I took The Jane Davenport water spirit and added some of the ink to it the dark navy blue And now I'm going to just go in And very lightly with a tip of the brush Just add some deeper green shadows again, keeping the Greens away from any of the Oranges or reds that are wet because I don't want them to go there That's actually pretty good. I might want to add a pop of just that navy color that Yeah This is the straight navy that Jane Davenport ink Just make it pop Taking a wet brush With no paint on it and blotting up some of the excess paint And or blending out Some places where there's too much pigment It's all about layering and putting The right colors in the right place and suggest to suggest your shapes I like that.  There it is uh, let's do Jane Davenport's Mermaid color Which is a teally green blue add a bunch of water to it. It's not so bright And then we're going to just Okay, any place that you've got paint that you don't want it just quickly go in And just blot it up with a rag a mr. Clean magic eraser works really well by the way All right, dry that Okay, take the tape off Which I didn't really need the tape because we didn't have like we weren't doing a skyscraper or anything But it's nice to do I think Keeps things a little bit contained and I'm going to take that same pink pen that we started with and right under here I'm gonna give it a title. Let's see. I think I did one earlier today. I signed it 2019 I did so that's wrong Oops All right, anyway And I don't think I can erase that. Let's see I doubt it. Okay. Let's fix that. There we go I hope so if I put the right date on things Anyway, there we go. There there you have it. There is a watercolor quick little watercolor painting That would be a cute little painting to put on the front of a card or anything Um, I hope that you all have if you're enjoying the watercolor tutorials that you have some sort of a journal like this That you just can do some watercolor play in This for those that are going to ask me because I know somebody is going to ask me. This is a moleskin. I think Yep, it's a moleskin Yeah, it's a moleskin watercolor journal. Um I don't remember what size it is. Let's see. It's like eight by Five so five by eight inch waters watercolor moleskin journal. So anyway, there you have it I hope that's something that you can get something out of that you enjoy watching the video and playing with your own paints If you have any questions comments or concerns, please leave them down below If you'd like to support the free content here on youtube or over in the facebook art groups that i'm in There's a lot of ways you can do that including patreon where you get free content and stuff that you don't get here um shopping in my etsy shop um Shopping in with my amazon affiliate link or Donating money to my paypal tip jar all of the links for those and a whole bunch of other stuff are in the description below The most important thing of course is to go out besides like share and subscribe go out and have a great day Do something nice for yourself because you deserve it and i'll see you later. Bye guys


What's happening guys Salah Mike back with another a fix your form a technique video today We are covering the squats trying to help you guys out if you want to get involved you can email ask M-i-k-k-e at gmail.com. Give me a front view side view three reps at 70% I'll see if I can help you guys out be sure to subscribe Turn on notifications so you guys can stick around and catch all the content my friends with this first Gentlemen getting a little bit on your toes my friends. So what I might suggest is Perhaps breaking at the knees a little bit earlier on the squat and pushing into those knees Also cleaning up your calves and your ankles a little bit Forcing those knees out the type of footwear may not be helping It's hard to tell they kind of look like just some trainers So a flatter shoe will allow you to feel the ground a little bit better with your entire foot Forcing your knee out will allow your hips to travel down more smoothly So then you're not tipping forward in the beginning and at the end on to your toes We want the general weight of our body and the barbell disperse throughout our entire foot Mostly on that midfoot But we want our whole foot on to the ground and forcing your knees out with a flatter shoe Will allow you to maintain that the entire time General mechanics are looking decent except for the fact that you're getting pitched forward so that maybe some ankle calf That needs cleaning up just Google some stretches or some mobility you can do on that guy But the flatter shoe and forcing those knees out. I think will be key to cleaning that guy up. Here we go Second squat. I don't love that walk out guys when we walk out. We want to get most efficient way To give us space from the racks or two to three steps end up in your squat form Looks actually pretty dang decent. We got a little bit overarching Extension of that low back. So what I'd like to see you do is breathe and brace a little bit harder People ask all the time Mike do a whole video on it I've done tons of videos on breathing or bracing This we want to do is breathe into our belly button our sides our obliques and our low back and almost crunched down We want a straight line a firm controlled midline You heard me firm and controlled from our hips to our shoulders and that'll allow us to push into the ground Keeping that midline stiff pushing and transferring the strength and the power Into the barbell.  It won't be an issue under heavier weights It will be a major issue and it can cause injury over time You can see a little bobble there in the hole. So something like a pause squat may also help you I believe this is the same a gentleman so pause squats may help you control that hole a little bit better and time your rebound and bracing that midsection Will help in the long run. I don't like the hands waving hello and goodbye in between the rep We should be squeezing that bar as tight as we can and pulling it down into our back We're squeezing our lats Which is the last piece to control that midsection just like in the deadlift just like in the bench if we breathe embrace correctly if we Pull the bar into us differently, but still using our lats and both the squat bench at deadlift We'll really control and have a stiff midline controlled midline will help So grab that bar tight. We say white knuckles and all three lifts Pulling that bar in the squat especially with your bar position pulling those elbows down and together will flex your lats flexing that midline But overall overall looks pretty dang solid my friend may want to control That eccentric just a little bit again because of that bobble so a tempo squat a pause squat Good accessories for you to build that pattern over time and work on that breathing embracing my friends That will be the key to everyone's safety everyone's longevity and everyone's gains in all lifts overhead clean and jerk snatch Squat bench. I don't care what it is. The more you can breathe embrace the better. You'll be This guy looks like he's losing a little control that first rep of that second rep looks a little bit better Third rep a little bit off as well. We'll try to see that bar position. What may help you Guys try to get the video landscape if you're sending it in And in as high quality as you can I think a lower bar position for you will help a lot with that pitching forward the lower bodies moving pretty good But so what's happening is your hips are shooting up a little bit early, and then you're getting pitched for it It could be the heels a lower heel or a flat shoe may do you a benefit as well A weightlifting shoe does allow some people to hit depth you even a little hair high So have some patience on the way down control that eccentric. We want to be quick, but don't hurry my friend So we talk about it a lot You do want to be Explosive and you do want to move quickly on the eccentric of the squat and the bench But not if it's pushing you out of position You want to be as fast and as explosive and as powerful as you can while maintaining a good position this Angle should tell us a little bit more of what's going on But the heel may just be a little too high a little smaller heel or even a flat shoe Doing some pause squats getting used to the depth It looks like you're hitting that depth and trying to rush your way up and that's where you're losing control into the hole Which is quite common. I talk about pace in the squat How you control your way down explode your way up and what pace you go up and down is key to a big squat From this angle looks pretty dang solid actually, but I think overall what we need is a hair more depth So I have some patience on the way down control on the way down And we also a lower bar position for you my friend may do better So if you can squeeze your back a little bit tighter and move that bar down Two to three inches will be in a better position there White knuckles again squeezing that bar as tight as you can pulling it down into your back I'm not sure if this camera is right on but it looks like your right foot is turned out a little bit more than left We want to be as symmetrical as possible Over time, you know baseball players golfers things of that nature get a repetition injuries because they're just throwing and throwing and throwing Tommy John, etc. Different tendon issues elbows issue shoulder issues the same can happen for power lifting Except now we're adding heavy loads So you want to really be sure to control your form and technique as well as be as symmetrical as possible Or you may over time get something a little jacked up in that right hip or even possible in the left hip because you're over compensating Look at solid so far Not bad. We got a long femur gentleman It looks like just a little bit awkward for you to squat by that overall looks pretty dang good Breathings pretty solid for you my friend. I also might recommend a flat shoe I know weightlifting shoes. They look cool. They're the accessory everyone squats 315 And they want to grab themselves some fancy weightlifting shoes But many a power lifter squatted big weight in a flat shoe and I think many people Can be overall better Movement patterns are better squatters with a flatter shoe. So Everything so far looks pretty dang decent but I just think that it with a wider a slightly wider stance getting your heels out a bit more and perhaps A flat shoe you can really force those knees out And it'll make you a little bit more efficient overall. It's pretty solid You're doing the best you can with these leverages pushing your hips back may help as well Knees going forward traveling towards your toes or going forward is not bad by any means Looks a little better from this angle A slightly Yeah, it looks pretty good man tight back tight middle everything looks pretty solid But pushing back with your hips may help you a little bit Get that posterior action a little bit and a little bit for less forward knee travel for this individual Many people some forward knee travel Is not going to injure you. It's not going to be harmful. It's a great way to build quads It's a great general way to squat But for each individual we'll kind of have to find how much our hips have to go back knees forward or knees out Depending on mobility and how you're built in this gentleman. I do think Kicking your heels out just a hair Maybe trying a flat shoe. Just give it a go And pushing your hips, excuse me back Just a little bit may help you long term Setting it up for the perfect camera angle to get the instagram likes because that's what brings in The paychecks in 2018. That's what I hear from all the gurus a lot of likes A lot of zeros in my bank account. Here we go. Nice long setup Again, we're kind of in a higher bar position bar position and Lower body and how it moves hip dominant or quad dominant aren't always The same so people talk about high bar low bar I do think that most people with the lower bar position will end up squatting more weight in the long run But depending on how you're built a higher bar position may be okay Overall looks pretty dang decent.  We're not trying to twerk here. We're trying to load the posterior chain By getting a slight angle Again, I think a lower bar position for you. My friend may help breathing embracing not shifting your hips back but hinging your hips back You can see that belt line if he was wearing a belt or your belly button starts to face the ground and that's because that hip Um Forcing your knees out a little bit more may help as well Again knees going forward is not an issue But opening up at the hips or the taint as the great ed cone said Which actually does make sense opening up at the hip region rather than just the knee again knees out Screwing into the ground all those are cues But what we're really trying to do is open up at the hips So if you have chub rub try to think about spreading that chub rub and letting some air flow up the skirt region Not only for your sake Of your squat, but also general stench in that region may not be great So open it up the hips Forcing those knees out breathe embrace a little bit harder and teach yourself how to hip hinge. There's many ways to do it There's many videos. I have one about pushing your hips back I talked about it a lot in the last deadlift video from last week Again, we're dropping these type of technique videos every sunday every saturdays some type of form Or informational video tuesday thursday travel vlogs gym vlogs General entertainment information coming your way guys. I appreciate all the support through all this be sure to subscribe Turn on the notifications. Share this around with your friends. I do appreciate you. I do appreciate the support Salam Mike. I'm out of here


So this conference has been framed by three types of crises, continuing crises, unexpected crises, and future crises. And what I'd like to do is talk to you about a population that can often be invisible in the context of unexpected crises. They can be overlooked, and they can fall through the grasp of preparedness and response efforts. And I also want to then talk about an initiative that has been launched over the course of the last two years and culminated earlier this year in June in a set of guidelines that focused on trying to address the gap. So the population I'm trying to talk about is migrants, or in other words, different categories of non-citizens, such as regular and irregular migrant workers of high skills and lesser skills, tourists, diplomats, business travelers, and victims of trafficking and smuggled migrants, who are affected by a crisis when the country in which they are present experiences either a conflict or a natural disaster. In June this year, at the UN in New York and in Geneva, the Migrants in Countries in Crisis Initiative launched a set of guidelines to better protect migrants caught in countries experiencing conflict or natural disaster. The initiative was co-chaired by the governments of the United States and the Philippines, and it also comprised of a range of other actors. The governments of Australia, Bangladesh, Costa Rica, and Ethiopia, the European Commission, as well as UNHCR, the International Center for Migration Policy Development, the Secretary General Special Representative on International Migration, and Georgetown University's Institute for the Study of International Migration. And the International Organization for Migration served as its secretariat and continues to do so. What these actors did was recognize that with over 244 million international migrants, most countries in the world host a migrant population. And at the same time, as we've heard throughout this conference, no country is really immune from unexpected crises. And even some of these crises, even if they can be predicted, the intensity, scale, and the geographic spread of crises cannot really be forecasted with any level of certainty. As many of you may be aware, in relation to the Libyan crisis, there were over 800,000 migrants that fled the country in just a matter of months. While most of these migrants were actually from neighboring countries, 120 odd nationalities were represented in the 800,000 odd migrants that fled the country. And then similarly in Japan, when the triple disaster struck, there were 700,000 foreigners living in the area that was affected. And again, migrants from a whole range of diverse countries, from China to Malaysia, from Brazil to Taiwan. And if you think back over the past 10 odd years, there have been a whole host of conflict and natural disaster situations in which migrants have actually been among those most seriously affected. So the 2004 tsunami saw a proportion of tourists affected. The 2006 war in Lebanon affected a whole host of migrant workers, including those working in a domestic capacity. The hurricane in the United States, Hurricane Sandy in New York, and New Jersey affected undocumented migrants. And the crisis in Yemen. And these are just a few examples. These unexpected crises can actually affect migrants differently to citizens. Migrants can present with quite unique needs and vulnerabilities that at a minimum need to be understood and taken into account in preparedness and response efforts. So if you think about language, some migrants may not necessarily have language capabilities in their host country. They may not know the local language. And this can inhibit their ability to understand information about risk and exposure to crises. It can inhibit their ability to understand how and what they need to do to access resources and assistance when a crisis actually erupts. Some migrants may have restrictions that are imposed on them as a result of their visas or their work permits. Their movements can be restricted to certain areas, or their visas may only allow them to enter the country once. And these types of restrictions can mean that migrants make adverse coping decisions, even in the face of a conflict or a natural disaster, and even at the expense of their own safety and security. Others may not actually be able to leave the crisis affected country because their identity and travel documents have been lost or destroyed. Or those documents may actually have been confiscated by their employers. And yet others, such as domestic workers who work in isolated conditions and don't have access to consular support or social networks, can often be beholden to the goodwill of their employers to escape harm. And finally, there can also be discrimination in terms of access to humanitarian assistance, even if it's not on the face of laws and policies in the way that those policies and laws are actually implemented. That said, at the same time, migrants don't just have needs and vulnerabilities. They themselves have resources, capacities, strengths, and skills that can actually be used to alleviate some of the very vulnerabilities that I've just mentioned to you. So their language capabilities, their cultural knowledge and understanding, the relationships of trust they've built with other migrant populations, and their access to irregular and isolated populations can be leveraged to better protect migrants in the context of crisis. So it was these very insights, really, that led the co-chairs in 2014 to launch the Migrants in Countries in Crisis Initiative, or the MICIC Initiative for short, and to engage in quite an extensive consultation process with multiple stakeholders, and then together develop a set of guidelines that are aimed at better protecting migrants. The consultations were held in most regions of the world, primarily with state representatives, but also with representatives of international organizations, private sector, and civil society. And in addition, dedicated consultations were held with these specific stakeholders. So consultations were held with international organizations, with private sector actors, as well as civil society, to make sure that multidimensional perspectives were incorporated into the guidelines that would ultimately be produced. So what I'd like to do with the little time that I have left is to take you through the guidelines and its main elements, and to tell you a little bit more about its scope and purpose and leave you to ask questions, but also let you know where you can actually access the relevant material. And in due course, I think Michelle will also talk a little bit about the guidelines and the process that led to their development, and how that has actually featured in the discussions at the 19th September UN General Assembly Summit. So just a little bit on the scope and purpose. These guidelines apply to situations in which migrants are already present in a country when that country experiences either a conflict or a natural disaster. It seeks to provide practical guidance to four types of stakeholders, states, international organizations, private sector actors, and civil society. The guidelines relate to actions that can be taken at the preparedness phase, at the emergency response phase, as well as in the aftermath of crises. And the expectation is that stakeholders use the guidelines to plan, prepare, and assess actions, and improve responses towards migrants, their families, and societies. So which migrants are we actually talking about? I've already foreshadowed this in my introduction, but we've defined migrants as non-citizens who are present in a country experiencing either a conflict or a natural disaster. And this is regardless of their means or their reasons of entry, regardless of their immigration status, and regardless of their length or reasons for stay. So migrants can include migrant workers and their families, can include victims of trafficking, smuggled migrants, tourists, students, business travelers, and even diplomats. Although in thinking about where you want to prioritise your responses, you'll probably focus on some of the more vulnerable categories. The term migrant doesn't refer to refugees, asylum seekers, or stateless persons. UNHCR wanted to make sure that the complementarities between the Miki Initiative guidelines and the refugee regime were taken into account in the guidelines, and so in that context, refugees, asylum seekers, and stateless persons are referred to in certain parts of the guidelines, but the term migrant doesn't actually refer to those categories of individuals. And as you may have already gathered, in terms of the crisis that we're focused on, their conflicts and natural disasters, and this was for political and pragmatic reasons that the co-chairs in the working group decided to focus on these types of crises, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the guidelines can't actually be used in other types of situations. I also just want to reiterate the stakeholders that the guidelines apply to. One of the things that we've heard during this conference, and especially in the introductory panel, was how important it is not to just focus on states as a primary actor in addressing impacts of crisis, and the guidelines recognise this. So they target states, but they also target private sector actors, international organisations, and civil society as key partners in trying to address this issue and this gap. And just a few other broad points before I move into the content. The guidelines are voluntary and non-binding, but this doesn't really take away from the fact that many areas of international law, including international human rights law, are relevant to the protection of migrants in the context of crises. And nothing in this document should be read as limiting or undermining any of the legal obligations that states are subject to under international law. And the guidelines explicitly say this. Similarly, nothing in the document should be read as limiting or undermining or detracting from domestic legal obligations and standards that apply to states or international organisations or civil society that actually protect migrants in a better way than the way that we've articulated protection in these guidelines. So what are the main elements of this document? Let me just highlight that quickly in the next five odd minutes. There are three substantive sections, a set of 10 principles, a set of 15 guidelines, and a whole host of illustrative practices. And each of these elements are intended to serve a different purpose. When we say principles, what we mean are foundational and cross-cutting precepts drawn in some instances from international law that should essentially inform and guide actions by all stakeholders during all phases of a crisis. The guidelines, on the other hand, are targeted suggestions. They're organised by theme and by phase and they identify in broad terms the actions that are needed to better protect migrants. And stakeholders can use the guidelines to inform and shape crisis preparedness, emergency response and post-crisis action. And the practices are just that. It's a selection of non-exhaustive examples that illustrate ways to implement the guidelines. They're based on existing practices as well as recommendations and can be adapted to suit particular contexts and situations and priorities. So these are the 10 principles and they really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. They're not controversial, they make a lot of sense. As I said earlier, they're foundational and they're intended to be cross-cutting. So the first one is importance of saving lives. Respect for the inherent humanity and dignity of migrants means that every possible effort should be taken to save their lives. So even though conflicts and natural disasters can present complex and distinct challenges, humanitarian assistance has to be prioritised in an uncompromising and non-discriminatory manner. Principle two highlights the importance of human rights. As human beings, all migrants have human rights and this is regardless of their immigration status. To effectively protect migrants' human rights, it requires an understanding of how discrimination and differences, including those that may be based on immigration status, can constrain access to resources and to safety. Principle three is drawn directly from international law and it highlights the fact that states do actually have the primary responsibility to protect migrants within their territory and states also have responsibilities towards their citizens even when they're travelling abroad. Principle four complements that, even though states have primary responsibility to protect migrants, there are a host of other actors, private sector actors, international organisations and civil society that play a significant role in doing the same and they can really support states to better protect migrants. So to realise this potential, approaches to protect migrants should involve the unique knowledge, skills and capacities of these different actors and barriers that actually inhibit these actors from better protecting migrants need to be eliminated. Principle five articulates that all action should be guarded by the four humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence. Principle six highlights the fact that migrants are actually rights holders but they're also really capable actors, resilient and creative in the face of crises and this agency needs to be recognised. They have the capacity to take charge of their own safety and wellbeing provided that they're given access to necessary information and the support they need to do so. So stakeholders need to create the types of conditions necessary for migrants to realise that potential and to help them enjoy their rights. Principle seven is about the fact that as mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, daughters, students and workers at all levels, migrants contribute to their families, communities and societies in both host and home states and communicating about them positively can counteract, can often counteract unfair and negative stereotypes about them and build their resilience to respond to crises. Principle eight is about the fact that effective and comprehensive responses can't only happen at one level, can't just happen at the international level or the national level, regional and local responses are also necessary. Often it's at the local level with local authorities and local non-state actors who are best placed to respond to migrants and to protect their needs. And this is because they're often the first responses and they're quite proximate to migrant populations. Principle nine is about the importance of partnerships. We've already talked about the fact that there are a range of different stakeholders and they have different skills and capacities and expertise and entering into cooperative arrangements and partnerships can often leverage those different capacities and strengths. And then principle 10 and one that's particularly relevant to this conference is about continuous research, learning and innovation to improve the collective response. So those are the principles that are articulated in the document. I don't think I'll go through the guidelines to the same level of detail, but what I'd like to say is that there are again, 15 in total, eight are in the preparedness phase, five are in the response phase and two are in the post-crisis phase. And the number of guidelines in the preparedness phase really underscores the fact that it's at this phase that much of the work needs to be done before the eruption of a crisis. Undertaking sufficient preparedness action means that you're building your capacity to mitigate the scope and scale of interventions that may be needed at the emergency phase and in its aftermath. Happy to take questions on the different guidelines. And for those of you who actually have a computer, I'll give you the website so that you can see where you can download the guidelines as well. But just a few more words on the last element of the guidelines. There are 80 odd pages of illustrative examples of practices and recommendations that help to implement the guidelines. And it's worth taking a look at those because they're quite extensive. And in addition to that, what we've recently done is launched an online repository that highlights real examples that stakeholders have taken in the context of crisis. So it's a searchable database that will allow you to obtain information about practices that have actually been implemented but also to know who you need to contact if you want to share or obtain further information. So let me just show you where that is. This is the website. The guidelines have now actually been translated into all their UN official languages. So you can read them to your heart's content in any language you like. And the repository is just over here. And you'll see the different thematic areas that are included in the repository in terms of practices and you can search through that. So my contact information is on the presentation which I think it will be uploaded later on into the UNU wider website for the conference. And the MIKIC initiative also has a secretary-ed email address. So feel free to get in touch. Thank you very much.