[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF WHITE NATIONALIST TERRORISM AT HOME AND ABROAD
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
WITH THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE AND CONTERTERRORISM
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
September 18, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-63
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://docs.house.gov,
or http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
37-706PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York, Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York Member
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida JOE WILSON, South Carolina
KAREN BASS, California SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts TED S. YOHO, Florida
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas JIM SENSENBRENNER, Wisconsin
DINA TITUS, Nevada ANN WAGNER, Missouri
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
DEAN PHILLPS, Minnesota JOHN CURTIS, Utah
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota KEN BUCK, Colorado
COLIN ALLRED, Texas RON WRIGHT, Texas
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania GREG PENCE, Indiana
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey STEVE WATKINS, Kansas
DAVID TRONE, Maryland MIKE GUEST, Mississippi
JIM COSTA, California
JUAN VARGAS, California
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
Jason Steinbaum, Staff Director
Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa, and International
Terrorism
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida, Chairman
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JOE WILSON, South Carolina,
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island Ranking Member
TED LIEU, California STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
COLIN ALLRED, Texas ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey LEE ZELDIN, New York
DAVID TRONE, Maryland BRIAN Mast, Florida
BRAD SHERMAN, California BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
JUAN VARGAS, California STEVEN WATKINS, Kansas
Casey Kustin, Staff Director
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi, Chairman
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Ranking
JAMES LANGEVIN, Rhode Island Member
CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana PETER KING, New York
DONALD PAYNE, New Jersey MICHAEL MCCAUL, Texas
KATHLEEN RICE, New York JOHN KATKO, New York
LOU CORREA, California MARK WALKER, North Carolina
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana
MAX ROSE, New York DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
LAUREN UNDERWOO, Illinois MARK GREEN, Tennessee
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan VAN TAYLOR, Texas
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania
AL GREEN, Texas DAN CRENSHAW, Texas
YVETTE CLARK, New York MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
DINA TITUS, Nevada DAN BISHOP, North Carolina
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
NANETTE BARRAGAR, California
VAL DEMINGS, Florida
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND COUNTERTERRORISM
MAX ROSE, New York, Chairman
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas MARK WALKER, North Carolina,
JAMES LANGEVIN, Rhode Island Ranking Member
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan PETER KING, New York
BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi, Ex MARK GREEN, Tennessee
Officio MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Ex Officio
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Miller-Idriss, Dr. Cynthia, Director, International Training and
Education Program, School of Education, American University.... 9
Picciolini, Mr. Christian, Founder, Free Radicals Project,
Author, ``Breaking Hate: Confronting the New Culture of
Extremism''.................................................... 23
Nazarian, Dr. Sharon, Senior Vice President for International
Affairs, Anti-Defamation League................................ 38
APPENDIX
Hearing Notice................................................... 99
Hearing Minutes.................................................. 100
Hearing Attendance............................................... 101
STATMENTS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Statement for the record submittedd from Representative Connolly. 102
Statement for the record submitted from Representative Jackson
Lee............................................................ 104
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Fewer Births Than Deaths Among Whites in Majority of U.S. States
submitted for the record from Representative Jackson Lee....... 113
ABC-News-Expert dissect reason why mass shooters target houses of
worship submitted for the record from Representative Jackson
Lee............................................................ 118
PBS-White Christians are now a minority of the U.S. population,
survey says submitted for the record from Representative
Jackson Lee.................................................... 121
List of Christan Places of Worship that have been Attacked
submitted for the record from Representative Jackson Lee....... 123
INFROMATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Video entitled ``No More Talk'' (9.17.19) submitted for the
record from Mr. Christian Piccilini, this video is retained in
the Committee file............................................. 127
MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF WHITE
NATIONALIST TERRORISM AT HOME AND ABROAD
Wednesday, September 18, 2019
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa, and International
Terrorism,
Committee on Foreign Affairs, joint with the
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2:14 p.m., in
room 310, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Theodore E. Deutch
(chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa,
and International Terrorism) presiding.
Mr. Deutch. This hearing will come to order.
Welcome, everyone.
The Committee on Foreign Affairs' Subcommittee on the
Middle East, North Africa, and International Terrorism is
meeting today together with the House Committee on Homeland
Security's Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism to
hear testimony on the domestic and global threat of white
nationalist terrorism.
I want to thank my co-chair of today's hearing,
Intelligence and Counterterrorism Subcommittee Chair Max Rose.
Thanks also to our ranking members, Joe Wilson and Mark Walker.
And I also want to thank the Homeland Security Chairman Benny
Thompson and Ranking Member Mike Rogers for hosting us in this
really beautiful Homeland Security Committee hearing room. And
I especially want to thank our witnesses for being here with us
today.
I hope this will be a serious examination of the threats
that we face here in the United States and overseas and the
interconnectivity of these threats.
I will now recognize myself for the purpose of making an
opening statement. And I will try to be brief, as we have a lot
to cover.
In recent months and years, it has become apparent that
white nationalist terrorism is a growing threat, both here and
abroad.
In order to solve this problem, we must first identify it.
Our government, intelligence services, and law enforcement
agencies use multiple terms for white nationalist terrorism,
including ``racially motivated extremists'' and ``white
supremacist extremists,'' among others. But when my
subcommittee held a hearing with the State Department's
Counterterrorism Coordinator in July, he was unable to call
this challenge by its name: white nationalist terrorism.
Tragically, this mounting threat reared its ugly head only
3 days later in the horrific attack in El Paso, Texas, that
killed 22 people. In the last year, it led to other attacks at
the Chabad Synagogue of Poway just north of San Diego; the Al
Noor Mosque in the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, New
Zealand; and the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh.
These attacks were preceded by, among others, a 2017 white
nationalist terrorist attack at the Islamic Cultural Centre of
Quebec City that killed 6, the 2015 terrorist attack at the
Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston that
killed 9, and the 2011 attacks by Anders Breivik that killed 77
people principally at a political youth camp in Norway.
While these acts of violence may appear disparate and
random, the terrorists allegedly responsible for them
demonstrably drew inspiration from one another. They share an
ideology that asserts, among other beliefs, that white people
and white identity in Western countries are under siege by
massive waves of immigration from non-white countries. White
nationalists also perpetuate conspiracy theories that claim
that Jews control industries, governments, and other
organizations through shadow groups which allegedly pose a
threat to white civilization.
White nationalists claim they are protecting the white race
and will use any means necessary to defend it against this
supposed dispossession. This ideology helps explain why their
targets include a wide array of people, from Latinx in Texas to
Jews in Pennsylvania, to Muslims in New Zealand, to African-
Americans in South Carolina and teenagers in Scandinavia.
The internet serves as a platform for white nationalists to
disseminate this twisted ideology and even to broadcast these
attacks. Technology enables interconnectivity between
decentralized white nationalist terrorists, organizations, and
networks and presents challenges to law enforcement efforts to
track, monitor, and disrupt planned violence.
White nationalist terrorism is a clear challenge to
democratic governance, and its adherents espouse principles
antithetical to both pluralistic values and to American ideals.
It is also clear that the U.S. Government, including the
State Department, is not doing enough to counter white
nationalist terrorism and to track the global nature of this
threat. We must learn more about how these movements recruit
and radicalize and how they share ideas across networks, just
as we seek to understand the interconnectivity of other
threats.
If we are to marginalize and isolate white nationalist
terrorism, a whole-of-society effort is required, one that
encompasses civil society and the private sector as well as
government. This hearing is a chance for our subcommittee to
gain a greater understanding of how the domestic and
international dimensions of white nationalist terrorism
overlap, especially regarding ideology, motivations, uses of
technology, radicalization, and recruitment.
White nationalist terrorism is not a Democratic or
Republican problem. It is not just a domestic threat or solely
an international challenge. I know we all take seriously the
need to combat white nationalist terrorism, and I hope that our
discussion today will help inform future efforts to meet this
growing global challenge. And I am working on legislation to
address our strategy to combat this threat that I hope and am
confident can be bipartisan.
I believe the insight and expertise of our witnesses will
be an important contribution to our discussion going forward. I
thank you for being here.
And it is now my honor to recognize Ranking Member Wilson
for the purpose of making an opening statement.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Chairman Ted Deutch, Chairman Max
Rose, and Ranking Member Mark Walker, for calling this joint
subcommittee hearing today.
There is no doubt that white supremacy extremism is a
dangerous and hateful ideology which must be addressed. In my
capacity as ranking member of the International Terrorism
Subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, I am
particularly interested in hearing more about the international
dimension of this troubling phenomenon.
Personally, I would like to learn more about the nature of
this threat from our witnesses. How big of an international
presence do white supremacy extremist groups have? How many
international attacks have these kinds of groups claimed?
Another important question is the organizational structure
of the threat. The Islamic extremist terrorist threat that we
have faced since September 11, 2001, appears to be much more
organized in nature than the one that we are discussing today.
While lone-wolf attacks carried out by individuals
radicalized by the ideology of Islamic extremist terrorist
groups have increased in recent years, this is still the
exception to the more traditional model of attacks directed by
a terrorist group.
However, when we look at international white supremacy
extremism attacks, they appear to be lone wolves inspired by
perverted ideology. The terrorist who massacred 51 civilians at
the mosque at Christchurch, New Zealand, in March claimed to be
inspired by the Norwegian attacker who killed 77 people in Oslo
in 2011. The shooter who killed 22 people in August at the
Walmart in El Paso, Texas, allegedly claimed to have been
inspired by the manifesto of the Christchurch shooter.
Additionally, in some cases, it appears that the
perpetrators of these attacks are inspired by a variety of
hateful ideologies, not just white supremacy extremism. For
example, the murderers in New Zealand and El Paso also were
described as eco-fascists.
With these murderous acts, are there bona fide linkages
between the international white supremacist extremist
attackers? Is this a real, united movement or deranged and
dangerous individuals inspired by toxic hate on the internet?
And, last, is this phenomenon different enough in nature
and structure from the current well-financed and organized
Islamic extremist terrorism threat that we face? Should we be
approaching it in the same ways? Should we be using the same
policy tools on a problem set that could be fundamentally
different?
We are faced with these critical questions. I look forward
to hearing from the witnesses today.
And, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
I now recognize Chairman Rose for the purpose of making an
opening statement.
Mr. Rose. Thank you, Chairman Deutch. And it is really
great to have these subcommittees together today, because we
cannot afford to really deal with this issue in a silo anymore.
So thank you again for setting this up.
I want to also thank our great partners and witnesses here
today. I look forward to hearing from you. Your work and the
work that we have seen thus far shows us that this white
nationalist threat is a threat that cannot be ignored.
White nationalist terrorists have killed more people in
recent years than any other type of domestic extremist. We also
know that 78 percent of extremist-related murders in the United
States last year were attributed to those adhering to a white
nationalist ideology.
On a larger scale, you know, we consider things as most
likely threat and most dangerous threat, and the most likely
threat from a terrorist perspective in America today is that of
a self-radicalized lone gunman, lone gunwoman. And I think I
speak for all of us today that we do not care which ideology
they ascribe to; we just care whether it is an extremist one
and a global one or not.
We have seen that this is also a problem spreading abroad
to our allies. In April, The New York Times published an
analysis showing that since 2011 approximately one-third of
white extremist killers were inspired by attacks globally. We
saw how an attack in Norway inspired one at Christchurch, which
inspired several here at home.
Unsurprisingly, all of this has also shed a light on the
world of social media companies as a catalyst for the spread of
white nationalist propaganda both here and abroad. No longer
can we look at these companies as exciting, new, unicorn
companies started by teenagers in hoodies. They are large,
global firms akin to General Motors. And I am sick and tired of
hearing them brag about success rates in and around 60 percent,
70 percent, 80 percent as it pertains to removing extremist
content. If an auto company bragged about 70 percent of their
airbags deploying, we would not think that that was
satisfactory.
This threat knows no boundaries. It does not end at
traditional borders, and it tears across continents. As elected
officials, I think our number-one priority is public safety,
and that is why I am so proud that we are all focusing on this
today.
We have to make sure that the Federal Government is working
better at data provision. Right now, the capacity of the
Federal Government to provide high-level analytics on the white
nationalist threat, the white extremist threat, and domestic
terrorism is not nearly satisfactory.
We also have to take into account that local law
enforcement is now in the intelligence-gathering business and
the terrorism-prevention business. I believe that the NYPD has
done an extraordinary job in this regard, and we have to make
sure that those lessons learned are supported for other law
enforcement agencies throughout the country.
Last, as I have said before, we have got to hold technology
companies to a standard. And I look forward to hearing your
thoughts about how, through public-private partnerships, we can
hold them to a standard and do that in a constitutional manner.
You know, we have set a framework for the last 20 years or
so about what we should do in regards to jihadist-inspired
global extremism. And now it is time for us to apply that
framework in a responsible manner to this new threat that we
face. We have got to consider how the State Department should
expand foreign terrorist organization lists to include these
violent international white supremacist groups.
Today, if an American citizen swears allegiance to ISIS or
another FTO and spreads their message of terror, there are
several and significant resources available to the Federal
Government and there are significant consequences for those
actions. However, if that same American citizen swears
allegiance to a white supremacist group based overseas and
spreads their message of terror, the Federal Government does
not have access to those same tools. And that is just, plain
and simple, wrong.
So I look forward to hearing your opinions today in regards
to the issues that I brought up.
And, with that, I thank the witnesses and the members for
being here today, and I look forward to making progress on this
important issue.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Chairman Rose.
I will now recognize Ranking Member Walker for the purpose
of making an opening statement.
Mr. Walker. Thank you much, Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to participate in today's hearing.
This week marks 56 years since the vicious murders of Addie
Mae Collins, Cynthia Morris Wesley, Carole Robertson, and Carol
Denise McNair at the hands of the Ku Klux Klan at the 16th
Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, a place where I was there
earlier this year honoring those lives. Over half a century
later, we are still dealing with hatred, racism, and violence.
There is no doubt that we must do more to counter these
threats.
The unfortunate reality is that no city in the United
States is immune. On August 3d, the country was horrified by a
domestic attack at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas, where the
killer was directly targeting immigrants and killed 22 innocent
people and wounding 24 more. The very next day, a young man
obsessed with violence and reportedly fueled by drugs carried
out a deadly attack on a public street in Dayton, Ohio, killing
9 people and wounding another 27 others. Several other attacks
were reportedly disrupted through good police work and alert
family members reporting these concerns.
We must not forget the other domestic terror attacks over
the past few years targeting radical and religious groups,
including the Tree of Life Synagogue, the Chabad of Poway
Synagogue, and the Emanuel African-American Methodist Episcopal
Church.
In June, we passed the 3-year anniversary of the attack on
the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and December will be 4
years since the San Bernardino attack. Also this past June, at
least 11 people were injured during an Antifa rally in
Portland, Oregon. And, the next month, an inherent to the same
ideology targeted a Department of Homeland Security facility in
Washington State.
The broad range of ideology-based hatred and societal
obsession with violence has left scars across our country. I
fully support an open and bipartisan discussion about domestic
terrorism, hateful ideologies, and recommendations for
addressing such threats.
I am concerned about reports of global interconnectedness
of United States-based domestic extremists and those overseas
who share the same views. The far-reaching ability of jihadists
to inspire and radicalize from their overseas safe havens have
resulted in several hundred Americans going overseas to join
their ranks or seek to carry out their attack in our homeland.
Are we seeing these same trends develop with domestic
extremists? While current data is not showing the same threat
level, there are dangerous similarities between jihadist
propaganda and the manifestos posted by domestic extremists. I
think it is important to hear from the intelligence community
and Federal law enforcement to get a full picture of the threat
stream.
Before closing, I do want to raise a concern that today's
hearing was scheduled with very little advance notice to the
minority side. That is not how the Committee on Homeland
Security has worked in the past, especially this subcommittee.
And I hope this is an anomaly and, going forward, the majority
will work in good faith to provide more notice, particularly on
hearings and roundtables related to such important things like
threats to our homeland.
I look forward to the testimony today, and I yield back.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Walker.
Without objection, all members may have 5 days to submit
statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record,
subject to the length limitations in the rules.
It is now my pleasure to introduce our witnesses.
Dr. Cynthia Miller-Idriss is Professor of Education and
Sociology and the director of research at the Center for
University Excellence at the American University in Washington,
DC. She has spent two decades researching radical and extreme
youth culture in Europe and the U.S. She also writes widely on
school-based responses to rising hate. She is a prolific author
and researcher and is a senior fellow at the Centre for
Analysis of the Radical Right. Previously, she taught at New
York University, the University of Maryland, and the University
of Michigan, where she also received her Ph.D. and two master's
degrees.
Mr. Christian Picciolini is an award-winning television
producer, a public speaker, author, peace advocate, and a
former violent extremist. Christian's involvement in and exit
from the American white supremacist skinhead movement is
chronicled in his memoir, ``White American Youth.'' He now
leads the Free Radicals Project, a global extremism prevention
and disengagement network, and has helped hundreds of
individuals leave hate behind. He also has a forthcoming book,
``Breaking Hate: Confronting the New Culture of Extremism.''
And, finally, Dr. Sharon Nazarian is Senior Vice President
of International Affairs at the Anti-Defamation League, where
she heads the ADL's work fighting anti-Semitism and racial
hatred globally, including overseeing ADL's Israel Office. She
is also the president of the philanthropic Y&S Nazarian Family
Foundation, the founder of the Y&S Nazarian Center for Israel
Studies at UCLA and chair of its advisory board, and a member
of the Council on Foreign Relations. She received her B.A.,
M.A., and Ph.D. from the University of Southern California.
Thanks to all of you for being here today.
Let me remind the witnesses to please limit your testimony
to 5 minutes.
And, without objection, your prepared written statements
will be made part of the hearing record.
Thank you so much for being here today.
And, Dr. Miller-Idriss, we would start with you because of
where you are sitting and because you hold so many degrees from
the University of Michigan. You are recognized.
STATEMENT OF DR. CYNTHIA MILLER-IDRISS, DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL
TRAINING AND EDUCATION PROGRAM, SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, AMERICAN
UNIVERSITY
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Thank you.
Chairman Rose, Chairman Deutch, Ranking Member Walker,
Ranking Member Wilson, members of the committee, I would like
to thank you for your service to this country and for calling
attention to the critical threat from global white nationalist
terrorism. I am honored to be here.
Today's focus is on white nationalist terrorism, which I
view as a subset of the broader phenomenon of white supremacist
extremism. I will use both terms interchangeably to refer to an
ideology that calls for lethal and mass violence as a solution
to a supposed existential threat posed to whites from
demographic change and immigration.
The growing global threat of white nationalist terrorism
and white supremacist extremism is well-documented. White
supremacist extremism is currently the most lethal form of
extremism in the U.S., causing at least 50 deaths in 2018.
My written testimony documents rising trends in several
areas: numbers of hate groups, propaganda, recruiting efforts,
hate crimes, domestic terrorism arrests, and mass shooting
plots. In my oral remarks, I would like to focus on how we
should understand white nationalist ideology, its growing
global interconnections, and what kinds of strategies might
help address it.
White nationalism is a global ideology. It integrates
racist and exclusionary beliefs with two core ideas which both
rely on mass violence as a solution.
The first is the idea of a great replacement, or white
genocide, which is based on a paranoid belief in an
orchestrated invasion of immigrants, Muslims, or Jews who will
eradicate or replace whites. These scenarios call whites to
urgent action with appeals to protect and defend against a
shared global threat of immigration and demographic change.
They have inspired mass terrorist violence in recent years in
Oslo, Pittsburgh, Christchurch, Poway, El Paso, and more.
White nationalist terrorists believe that the only way to
prevent the ultimate genocide of white populations by non-
whites is through an apocalyptic race war which will result in
a restored white civilizational rebirth.
Although there are important differences between Islamist
and white supremacist extremisms, there are striking
similarities to the Islamist extremist effort to restore the
caliphate. In this sense, Islamist and white nationalist
terrorists share a similar apocalyptic vision and use similar
violent strategies to get there.
White nationalist terrorists not only believe that a
violent apocalypse is coming but also that the fastest way to
reach the phase of racial rebirth is to accelerate the path to
a new white civilization by speeding up polarization and
undermining social stability.
Violence is foundational to this approach because violent
acts create immediate societal panic, inspire copycat actors,
and encourage reciprocal or revenge terror attacks. For this
reason, each violent act of terror is viewed as heroic,
celebrated globally, and is understood to bring the movement
one step further toward societal collapse and a new white
civilization.
Youth are attracted to this ideology in part for how it
channels grievances and personal trauma into anger, blame, and
resistance but also because it offers a sense of meaning,
purpose, and a way to engage heroically with a brotherhood of
warriors who seek to save the white race from an imminent
threat.
White nationalists are globally interconnected in at least
five expanding areas: increasing crowdsourcing online, enabling
more fundraising and growing financial interconnections;
increasing sharing of tactics, techniques, and procedures, or
TTPs, for attacks and other support activities, potentially
contributing to more attacks; increased cross-national
recruitment for combat--so Ali Soufan testified earlier this
month that over 17,000 fighters from Western countries,
including many from the U.S., have traveled to Ukraine to
fight, mostly for white supremacist groups; increased sharing
of manifestos and live-streamed attacks, driving more
inspiration from terrorist attacks globally; and increased
global gateways to extremist youth scenes that help build more
networked relationships.
Social media and online relationships and modes of
communication are key to supporting all five of these global
strategies and are essential to the radicalization pathways of
youth.
White nationalist terrorism will almost certainly continue
to get worse. We face a highly contested election season,
growing disinformation campaigns, increasing migration flows,
and a social media landscape that enables hate to grow and
thrive.
There are steps that Congress can take to address this
growing threat. We need improved interagency coordination, a
rethinking of the division between international and domestic
terrorism, and paths for cross-national collaboration with our
allies.
Federal and local law enforcement need resources and
direction. We need improved national research capacity and
expertise. And we need pathways to support local community
engagement, communication, and preventative education.
For the safety and security of our Nation but also for the
well-being of all the youth, families, and local communities
you represent, I urge this Congress to act to prevent violent
terrorist attacks and help interrupt radicalization pathways
before they begin.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Miller-Idriss follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Dr. Miller-Idriss.
Mr. Picciolini.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTIAN PICCIOLINI, FOUNDER, FREE RADICALS
PROJECT, AUTHOR, ``BREAKING HATE: CONFRONTING THE NEW CULTURE
OF EXTREMISM''
Mr. Picciolini. Thank you, Chairman Deutch, Chairman Rose,
Ranking Members Wilson and Walker, and distinguished members of
this vital committee--both vital committees and institution.
I am honored by your invitation to testify today. I also
want to acknowledge that I am privileged to be here,
considering my past.
I am a former extremist. In 1987, I was recruited into
America's first neo-Nazi skinhead group and, at 14 years old,
became one of the youngest and earliest members of what was
then a fringe hate movement.
For the next 8 years, I recruited other vulnerable youth,
acted as a mouthpiece for hate, and wrote racist music that I
performed for thousands of white supremacists across the United
States and Europe.
I rose quickly through the ranks to become a leader of the
same white nationalist movement that, 30 years later, on August
12, 2017, marched in Charlottesville, chanting, ``The Jews will
not replace us,'' and killed a young woman named Heather Heyer.
I escaped extremism in 1996 through the compassion of
people I least deserved it from. Black and Latinx Americans,
Jews, people from the LGBTQ community, and Muslims brought me
back to humanity.
After disengaging, I obsessed over how a typical, middle-
class, teenage son of Italian-American immigrant parents could
become a violent white supremacist who forged alliances
overseas. To better understand my own radicalization, I went
back in, this time to prevent others from venturing down the
same dark path.
The number of former extremists I have helped disengage--
``formers,'' as we are called--is now in the hundreds from
around the world, including a returned foreign fighter of the
so-called Islamic State.
What I have learned over 30 years is that the United States
is losing vital ground in a battle we have yet to acknowledge
exists on some levels. Violence by white supremacists has
skyrocketed in America. Data from the FBI and groups like the
Anti-Defamation League clearly document this disturbing trend.
But the greater threat that has gone largely unnoticed and
unchallenged for decades is how the tentacles of American white
nationalism extend far beyond our borders and into a deep
network of global terror.
American white nationalists have spent decades building
alliances with their counterparts overseas. They have developed
a sophisticated online presence and receive material support
from foreign allies through digital influence campaigns that
directly bolster their narratives and propaganda and extend
their reach.
Like ISIS, white nationalists also distribute glossy print
and electronic propaganda and produce high-quality recruitment
videos. They trade in digital cryptocurrency, use social media
on encrypted platforms to communicate, share ideas and
resources, lure new sympathizers, and plan attacks. This is
just what is occurring online.
In 2018, the FBI reported white supremacists from
Scandinavia, Northern Europe, and the United States were
training as foreign fighters with foreign paramilitary groups
like the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion in Ukraine and in far-right
partisan training camps in Russia.
They inflict terror the same way as foreign terrorist
groups: bombing government facilities, planned interruption of
critical infrastructure, using high-capacity military-style
assault weapons against soft civilian targets, assassinations,
and the use of vehicles to target crowds.
We tend to view white nationalist attacks, like those in
Charleston or El Paso, as isolated hate crimes, but I cannot
stress enough that this view is naive and dangerous and will
continue to expose Americans until we acknowledge that this
threat is persistent and pervasive.
White nationalism is a fast-growing global movement whose
members are preparing for a coming race war while
simultaneously trying to initiate one.
The shooter in the attacks on two mosques in Christchurch,
New Zealand, earlier this year posted a manifesto online deeply
aligned with the core ideas of American white supremacist
leaders. Though he was a 28-year-old Australian, in a video of
the attack a Ukrainian Azov Battalion patch was visible on his
body armor.
This is just one example of how international cooperation
leads to a body count. There are dozens more deadly incidents
that have occurred recently right here at home. When we think
of terrorism by the so-called Islamic State, we acknowledge the
international dimensionality and the foreign special interests
that allow it to exist and grow. We must do the same when it
comes to white nationalist terrorism as a matter of national
security.
Adequate terrorism laws already exist to thwart and
prosecute terrorists, as do plenty of capable and talented
people who are ready to defend us from the threat of harm. But
the current counterterrorism mandate does not provide for the
proper focus, resources, funding, or, in some cases, the
correct holistic approach to effectively counter extremism.
Keeping Americans safe requires a strategy that redefines
the threats we face, and it must be a balanced, nonpolitical,
nonpartisan, and nondiscriminatory approach that recognizes
violent nationalism as part of the global threat matrix.
But neutralizing violence is only half of the equation.
Preventing radicalization in future generations of Americans is
also critical. Policy reform and a public health approach that
protects those who are vulnerable to recruitment and offers
services to people who want to disengage will be thekey to
long-term success in countering violence-based extremism.
I have submitted an expanded written statement for the
record, including a video, and I am at your disposal. Thank you
very much. I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Picciolini follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Deutch. Thank you so much for being here, Mr.
Picciolini.
Dr. Nazarian.
STATEMENT OF DR. SHARON NAZARIAN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
Dr. Nazarian. Good afternoon, Chairmen Deutch and Rose,
Ranking Members Wilson and Walker, and members of the
subcommittees. My name is Sharon Nazarian, and I serve as
senior vice president for international affairs at the Anti-
Defamation League. It is an honor to appear before you today.
I am here today to speak to you about the
internationalization and increasing interconnectedness of white
supremacist ideology around the world, which aims to
dehumanize, threaten, and eradicate whole communities.
White supremacy is a transnational terrorist threat that
has already begun to engulf us all. Of the extremist-related
domestic murders in the U.S. in 2018, ADL has determined that
78 percent were perpetrated by white supremacists.
The threat of homegrown terrorism inspired by Islamist
extremist propaganda remains clear and present. In recent
years, however, we have seen an increase in other types of
violent extremism, and our government has failed to take
sufficient measures to also address this rising threat.
While white supremacists use various euphemisms to describe
themselves, including ``white nationalist,'' ``race realist,''
and ``Identitarian,'' there should be no uncertainly that the
perpetrators of these attacks and the ideological community
that inspires them are hateful supremacists.
Over the past 8 years, more than 175 people have died at
the hands of white supremacists worldwide. There is a through-
line from Charlottesville to Pittsburgh, to Christchurch,
Poway, and El Paso.
The Christchurch killer, who slaughtered over 50 innocent
people, cited in his manifesto Dylann Roof and Norwegian white
supremacist Anders Breivik, who had perpetrated their own white
supremacist terror attacks in 2011 and 2015. The Christchurch
shooter, in turn, was cited as an inspiration by attackers at
Poway, El Paso, and an attempted shooting at a mosque recently
in Norway.
In a report ADL released today titled ``Hate Beyond
Borders''--that I have here with me--``The Internationalization
of White Supremacy,'' we detail this phenomenon. These findings
are a result of the collaboration that is unprecedented between
researchers at the ADL Center on Extremism and extremism
researchers in five countries, named the Amadeu Antonio
Foundation in Germany, the Community Security Trust in the
U.K., the Expo Foundation in Sweden, the Observatory of
Political Radicalism in France, and the ``Never Again''
Association in Poland. The report chronicles the deepening ties
between extremists in Europe and their white supremacist
counterparts in America.
The internet has increased the global interconnectedness of
white supremacists, helping to accelerate their movement's
deadly impact. The internet also offers community. While most
extremists are not affiliated with organized groups, online
forums allow isolated extremists to become more radicalized and
dangerous. The most extreme forms of online content thrive on
unregulated message boards like 8chan, Gab, and 4chan, but
larger social media platforms need to remain vigilant as well.
There is a lot more that the U.S. Government can do to
address this threat, and we must start with leaders using their
bully pulpit. The President, Cabinet officials, Members of
Congress must call out white supremacy at every opportunity and
have a responsibility not to engage in scapegoating of
vulnerable groups. We cannot say it enough that America is no
place for hate.
ADL endorses several piece of legislation that would help
as well, including the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act, the
DATA Act, the NO HATE Act, and the Disarm Hate Act. In
addition, Congress can strengthen laws against perpetrators of
online misconduct and can encourage online forums to implement
more robust governance against cyber-hate.
Finally, Congress and the State Department should closely
examine whether it would be appropriate and effective to
sanction certain white supremacist groups operating abroad if
they meet the State Department's criteria for foreign terrorist
organizations. Several countries, such as Canada and the U.K.,
have already added specific violent supremacist groups to their
terrorism list.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and for calling a
hearing on this very important topic. We must act swiftly,
decisively, and comprehensively to counter this threat and
prevent it from metastasizing.
On behalf of the ADL, we look forward to working with you
as you continue to devote your urgent attention to this issue.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Nazarian follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Deutch. Thank you so much, Dr. Nazarian.
Thanks to all the witnesses for their testimony.
We will now move to member questions under the 5-minute
rule. Chairman Rose will begin, followed by Ranking Member
Walker.
Chairman Rose.
Mr. Rose. Thank you, Chairman Deutch.
I thank you all for your testimony.
I would like to zero in on this issue of the actual
infrastructure of these global organizations. Can you speak to,
from both a training as well as ideological communication, what
do these organizations look like? Can you please include names?
Can you please include where they are based out of? How many
countries they are--you do not have to be that specific, but
regions.
And, most especially, could you please note their
similarities to organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda, not just
as they exist now but especially as they existed in thelate
1980's and 1990's before they started attacking the West with
large-scale attacks?
Dr. Miller-Idriss, we will start with you.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. First, I would like to say thank you for
your service to this country, and I appreciate that.
It is a very good question. I think I will speak primarily
to the ideology. And I will say, I would prefer not to name
groups here, but I would be happy to do that off the record.
Just that I do not want to give any additional oxygen to groups
that will celebrate that in a video clip.
So I do think that what we are seeing with ideology is
organized ideology coming through recruiters, through social
platforms like YouTube, which--and they are getting around bans
by using encrypted channels, so working very carefully to avoid
algorithms, avoid bans, but then sharing encrypted channel
information so that young people who view those can then go to
encrypted channels to receive further ideological information.
We know that there are training camps being run both, you
know, overseas and in this country. There are, kind of, militia
trainings and preparation in that way.
And we know that they are working together in partnership
to crowdsource, kind of, funding sometimes for activities,
funding for legal troubles that they get themselves into, and
working in that way, kind of, over the internet to support each
other.
Mr. Rose. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Picciolini. If I may, to add to what the doctor said,
the tactics are similar. And, first of all, when I was a 14-
year-old, I did not think I was joining a local group; I
thought I was joining a global movement. So even 30 years ago,
the idea of it being global existed.
Very quickly, I took my work overseas. I was in one of the
first American neo-Nazi bands to leave the U.S. and perform in
Europe. So there was money and propaganda being traded even
then, before the internet. This is not something new because of
the internet.
But to point out a specific group, called Atomwaffen
Division, here in the United States, which is responsible for
at least five murders in the last 2 years, operates very much
like an ISIS terror cell. They are anonymous. They do not
necessarily know who each other are.
They do train in what they call hate camps. There has been
a hate camp in Virginia where they train with paramilitary
style weapons; also in Nevada, in the desert. And there is one
being planned by a group that is a splinter of Atomwaffen
Division that is called The Base, which is a literal
translation for ``al-Qaeda,'' that is going to be training in
Washington.
As far as ideology, it is consistent globally. There is
very little difference, if anything, between the groups that
operate internationally and the groups that operate here. But I
also want to make clear that it is less about the group
structure these days and it is more about, kind of, what is
being called the leaderless resistance. While the ideology
controls what they are doing, there is no hierarchy in terms of
structure for groups.
So, while we may see the group dynamic becoming less
popular, we should not think that this is going away. What is
happening over the last 30 years is that the strategic plan was
to become invisible. We encouraged people in the late 1980's
and 1990's to not shave their heads, to not wear boots, so that
they could blend in. There was heat coming from law enforcement
and groups were being taken down, so they encouraged people to
go out and try and radicalize others without bringing them into
a group structure.
Mr. Rose. Dr. Nazarian.
Dr. Nazarian. So what I can tell you is that the level of
cross-pollinization is huge. Structurally, in-person meetings,
like conferences, rallies, music festivals, have become even
bigger, and you see presence of American white supremacists in
Europe and vice versa. We saw it at Charlottesville. That was a
very clear indicator for us, where we saw the presence of
European white supremacists at the Charlottesville rally.
Online, what we are seeing, they are sharing podcasts.
Gaming has become a huge platform, something that most
legislators and others are not paying attention to. And I would
say that messaging boards like I mentioned--8chan, Gab--these
are places where, in a different way from ISIS and al-Qaeda,
where there is no real physical place, this is the community
that they belong to.
This is truly a global effort, and it becomes a huge
attraction point for disaffected men, youth----
Mr. Rose. Sure.
Ms. Nazarian [continuing]. To say that they feel----
Mr. Rose. Thank you for your testimony.
I just do want to put it out there that, in the coming
days, we will be sending or distributing a letter to the
Secretary of State identifying specific white nationalist
foreign terrorist organizations, or organizations that we
believe should be FTOs, and I certainly would appreciate the
support of my colleagues here.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Chairman Rose.
Ranking Member Walker, you are recognized.
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Miller-Idriss, I have a very important question to
start with. I am assuming, by the colors that you are wearing
today, your allegiance would be Terrapin more than Wolverine?
Or is this just strictly a coincidence?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Well, I was also a Cornellian, which is
the Big Red, as you know.
Mr. Walker. All right. Fair enough. We will move on from
there.
To your knowledge, have foreign-based members of white
supremacist groups traveled to the U.S. to meet with groups or
individuals here?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. We know that individuals have come to
Charlottesville. And we also have very good evidence of
individuals from the U.S. going to Europe. So, yes, I think in
both directions there is----
Mr. Walker. So you do have some cases here or there that
you have seen this.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes.
Mr. Walker. OK. Great. Thank you for answering that.
Since the 9/11 terror attacks, the government and public
has promoted the ``See Something, Say Something'' concept to
help alert law enforcement to terror threats. In May, the FBI
testified that 50 percent of the domestic terror investigations
are opened due to referrals from the public and other State and
local partners.
Do you have any recommendations to further improve the
Suspicious Activity Reporting System?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I think the hardest thing about that is
that the people who are most likely to know something are
peers, are other young people, and we also know that they are
the least likely to come forward. I think that public education
on that can go a long way.
We have also seen parents, in very recent years, being a
very good source of information. But I will say that one thing
that we lack compared to Europe is that, even when parents know
something is going on, they do not know who to call. They are
reluctant to call the FBI. They are reluctant to call the
police.
I would suggest that if we had something like a suicide
hotline number, a phone number that parents could call that was
to get information--that, you know, we have resources, but
parents who do fear that their children are planning something
do not know how to get help in a way that they think will be
useful.
Mr. Walker. Thank you.
And, Mr. Picciolini, if I have time, I am going to come
back to you, because I can tell that you may want to add
something there.
Let me go to Dr. Nazarian, if I could, please.
I believe you mentioned the number, over 8 years, 175
deaths internationally. Did I get that number correct?
Dr. Nazarian. Yes.
Mr. Walker. OK. And one is too many. Twenty-one per year.
And I think part of what we are doing today is, as much as the
numbers, we are trying to prevent the trend, as well, in that
direction.
Could you answer the question that I have for you? How many
deaths over that same 8-year period of time has been due to
religious zealots? Dr. Miller-Idriss mentioned Islamists, some
of the fundamentalists there. Over that same 8-year period of
time, how many murders or deaths or killings in that arena?
Dr. Nazarian. I do not have that number in front of me, so
I cannot tell you exactly. But what I want to be very careful
about is this is not an either/or discussion.
Mr. Walker. No, no, no. And I am getting to that, but I had
a specific question. So you have no idea of that?
Dr. Nazarian. I do not. I am happy to provide that to you
in writing afterwards. I do not have that number.
Mr. Walker. Dr. Miller-Idriss, would you have any idea on
that number?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Not, also, in my documents here.
Mr. Walker. Because, ultimately, we are wanting to be able
to deal with both. So I think both those numbers are important,
should not they be? You would agree with that?
Dr. Nazarian. Absolutely, yes.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes.
Mr. Walker. According to CBS, in 2017 they have a number of
84,000 that have been murdered. And I want do some kind of
backup. I am just coming up with this number in the last hour,
so I want to make sure that number is valid. But I just want to
make sure that we are concerned about that.
I have a question--I have time to get both in--going back
to Dr. Miller-Idriss.
Given the concerns raised here today about domestic
terrorism, specifically white supremacy extremism, do you have
concerns about the ability of law enforcement to monitor
domestic terror threats in locations where cities have pulled
out the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force, or the JTTF? San
Francisco, Portland, and some others have pulled out. Is that a
concern for you at all?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I do have concerns about whether local
law enforcement is adequately prepared, particularly given the
evolving nature of the threat. The fact that the symbols have
changed so much, the clothing has changed, the signals have
changed, I am not sure that we really have awareness among
local law enforcement or among teachers, for example, who would
also be useful.
Mr. Walker. Yes.
A quick ``yes'' or ``no'' question. Do you find it
difficult to potentially create policy that remains cognizant
of the Constitution and the U.S. citizens' rights while also
enabling law enforcement to detect and prevent Americans from
being radicalized to the point of violence? Just for clarity, I
know that is a struggle for us sometimes, the liberty versus
the privacy and all that.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes, I think that is a very big concern.
But I also think we have 20 years of experience now that we can
draw on on seeing how we have done that with the American
Muslim community to see what has gone wrong, what has gone
right. And I would encourage us to think about that.
Mr. Walker. And I want to honor my word to try to get back
in Mr. Picciolini.
Would you mind addressing for us some additional things
that we could do for the question that I asked the doctor?
Mr. Picciolini. Sure. And I just wanted to address that in
my expanded statement I did name organizations that were global
and domestic for that report.
You know, it is very difficult for peers to identify----
Mr. Walker. And I only have about 10 seconds, so I just
want to be honorable to the rest of the members here.
Mr. Picciolini. Sure. White supremacists have done a very
good job of hiding themselves over the last 30 years. It is
very difficult to identify them.
Mr. Walker. OK. Thank you.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Walker.
We are going to alternate between parties and between
subcommittees. I am going to defer for now and turn it over to
Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chair.
And welcome to our witnesses.
I think this is a very important and consequential hearing,
because we are not giving this topic the kind of attention it
most certainly deserves, not to make a point, but to, frankly,
protect society and to expose what is truly a conspiracy that
harms people and, as you point out, Mr. Picciolini, kills
people.
I am from Virginia, and we saw the harm white supremacism
can do in a peaceful university community that prides itself on
being inclusive and accepting and diverse. And it was
horrifying for all of us who know Charlottesville to witness
what took place because an outside group decided to make it an
object lesson of their hate.
So thank all three of you for being here.
Dr. Miller-Idriss, let me just ask, not including 9/11,
obviously, terrorist incidents here in the United States, white
supremacists have, in the grisly count, frankly, been, you
know, responsible for more deaths than anything associated with
jihadist movements. Would that be a fair statement?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes, I believe that is a true statement
in history. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. So when we look at the resources the Federal
Government has marshaled to deal with, say, the jihadist
terrorist threat, they are considerable. Would that be a fair
statement?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes, I believe they are considerable.
Mr. Connolly. In the tens of billions of dollars, maybe
more.
Now, given the fact that the white supremacist terrorist
threat, depending on how you measure it, is certainly equal to,
if not greater than, domestically, the jihadist terrorist
threat, surely the resources devoted to addressing the white
supremacist threat are comparable to those of the jihadist
threat. Is that fair?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. The resource question is--they are not
equal resources.
Mr. Connolly. They are not equal.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. No.
Mr. Connolly. Would it be fair to say they are not even
close?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. They are not even close.
Mr. Connolly. And are there consequences that flow from
that kind of disequilibrium in terms of the allocation of
resources to the actual, measured, demonstrable threat, not the
theoretical or fear-based threat?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes, there are consequences. And I will
just say--this is from my written testimony--that the FBI has
testified that 80 percent of their agents focus on
international terrorism, 20 on domestic. They were able to stop
70 percent of terrorist activities from Islamist groups in 2018
but only 29 percent of the white supremacist extremist attacks.
Mr. Connolly. And, by the way, my friend was talking about
religious zealotry versus something else. But, Mr. Picciolini,
given your experience, would it not be fair to say many of the
white supremacists consider themselves religious zealots,
right? They are promoting a certain culture and ethos from
their point of view. Is that correct?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes, sir. That is correct.
Mr. Connolly. It would be a jihadist culture, but it would
certainly be a radical and extreme version of their version of
Christianity, in many cases.
Mr. Picciolini. That is correct. And, also, in many cases,
they refer to themselves as white jihadists.
Mr. Connolly. So, in the time I have left after, Mr.
Chairman, having established that there is this disequilibrium
in resources devoted to the actual, measured threat, which I
think this subcommittee deserves credit for having uncovered--
and I hope legislatively we will address that--I would like to
give you an opportunity, Mr. Picciolini, to talk a little bit
about your story.
I mean, would it be fair to say that what motivated you,
way back when, to join these groups or associate with them was
maybe--certainly, two things: One was a sense of belonging, but
the other was maybe fear and insecurity?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.
You know, ideology is really secondary to becoming
radicalized. And I say radicalization starts the day we are
born. For me, it was searching for a sense of identity,
community, and purpose, all three of which I felt I did not
really have a grasp on in my life.
My parents are Italian immigrants who came to the U.S. in
the mid-1960's. And, as immigrants, they had to work 7 days a
week, 16 hours a day. So I did not see them very much, growing
up. I knew they loved me, and they still, you know, do, but I
did not see them. So I went searching for family elsewhere and
for a sense of agency and inclusion.
I was idealistic as a kid, but I certainly was not mature
enough to know that I was making the right or wrong decisions
at that time.
Mr. Connolly. Am I up? Is my time up?
Mr. Deutch. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chairman. I thank him for his
courtesy.
Thank you all for the courage of being here today. We
really appreciate your testimony.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Wilson, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank each of you for being here today.
And, Dr. Miller-Idriss, I particularly appreciate your
comment about not identifying particular groups to give them
attention. I was just mentioning to the chairman that I
specifically never mention the name of any of the mass
murderers who have conducted their operations. They just should
not be given personal recognition. That is what they want.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I absolutely agree.
Mr. Wilson. And so, with that in mind, how do we identify--
and for each of you--the different extremist groups? And where
are they located? What kind of membership do they have?
And then, not long ago, we all faced a very identifiable
hate group, the Ku Klux Klan. What is the status of the KKK?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. The KKK is thriving, as are other
groups.
We see also internationally--I will say, one of the
interesting things I have read recently showed that, when
Facebook kicked the Ku Klux Klan off of Facebook, they migrated
to a Russian platform called VKontakte. And then, in the
Ukraine, there were 60 separate KKK groups operating on
VKontakte when the Ukraine banned that platform. And then they
evolved, and those groups came back to Facebook, some of them,
by using the Cyrillic letters. They got smarter.
So, you know, it is also an example of how single-platform
banning does not always work; it can make the situation worse.
But they are thriving. I think there are really good
experts around in the U.S. and also from our allies overseas
who can also meet off the record and can provide lists of
groups and where they are. And I know all of us would be happy
to do that afterward as well.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you.
Mr. Picciolini, do you have a comment on that?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes. Thank you, Ranking Member Wilson.
The groups really are everywhere. And it is less about the
groups than it is about the individuals, and they are
everywhere. I get requests, probably a dozen or so every week,
from either people wanting to disengage from hate groups or
from white supremacy, or from parents of children who are
horrified that their kids are being recruited over video games,
through theheadsets, playing multiplayer online games, through
depression forums online, through autism forums, where they are
hunting for people. Those are the types of tactics that groups
like ISIS use as well.
But there was a concerted strategy 30 years ago to really
move away from the more visible elements of the movement into a
more mainstreaming of the ideology. We encouraged people to not
look extreme. We wanted them to go into things like the
military to get explosives training, to join law enforcement,
to run for office in some cases. And, in some cases, back in
the 1980's and 1990's, we were successful with that.
The process really started in the late 1980's with David
Duke, who removed his Klan robe and was elected to the House of
Representatives. That really started the process of
mainstreaming this ideology. And it has really taken on a life
of its own since then.
Dr. Nazarian. I would like to add that we have to keep in
mind that most of the most violent shooters do not belong to
specific groups. They are lone wolves, and they are
radicalized. So it is important to keep in mind that, really,
the most extreme ones are self-radicalized. And that is why I
want to bring attention to what is going on online.
We at the ADL have actually brought members of law
enforcement from across Europe to our Advanced Training School
that we do in Washington, DC, once or twice a year, and we
really train them specifically about the symbology, about what
kind of cross-pollinization is going on, the ideology.
But it is really the internet where we think platforms,
both mainstream and some of the ones I mentioned and the gaming
that I mentioned, are the structures where we have to really
look. That is where they are meeting. That is the community
that they come to and believe in and feel a part of this global
movement.
So, if I could reiterate one point, it is really about
ourselves, the media companies, social media companies, the
platforms have to be responsible in helping us collect data,
and understand where the threats are coming from. They are
talking about these things, and they are being monitored. So we
have data that we should be able to have more transparency
toward and to be able to see through, where are the threats
coming from? And we just do not have that transparency right
now. So I think the platforms really have a role here to play.
Mr. Wilson. Well, thank each of you for raising these
issues, and we look forward to working with you in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Cicilline, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to our witnesses, and thank you, Chairman, for
this really important and very sobering hearing.
I want to just ask Dr. Miller-Idriss, you make reference in
your written testimony that white supremacist extremism is the
most lethal form of extremism in the United States right now,
with 50 deaths in 2018, the fourth-deadliest year since 1970,
that hate groups are at a record high, white nationalist groups
increasing by 50 percent--50 percent--in 2018.
And so I guess my first question is, while we have to think
about how do we protect the American people and be sure law
enforcement has the resources--and I am interested to speak to
Mr. Picciolini about ways to disengage people--I guess the
first question I have is: Is there research that shows what is
causing this?
This is a significant increase. And it seems to me,
understanding what are some of the causes of this that we might
prevent would be a very efficient way of start thinking about
responding to this challenge.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes. That is a great question.
I think what we know is that young people, especially--I
mean, it is not only young people, but young people,
especially, have a set of grievances that are then, kind of,
weaponized through online culture. They were led to a sense of
feeling insecure, feeling excluded, feeling economically
marginalized. We call it ``aggrieved entitlement,'' a sense
that they deserve something better that they did not get.
And then online they meet these narratives that tell them,
you know, that there is a pathway for you to make a difference,
to be a part of something bigger and better than yourself, to
enact a sense of meaning, to be a hero. And also a place to
express anger. And we know that anger and rage is part of it as
well.
But I think those emotional--and I really want to second
what Christian said, that these emotional underpinnings are the
draw, and then the ideology comes second.
And so, when we think about preventive work, we have to
think about what it takes to offer young people places to enact
meaning, places to be a hero, places to engage meaningfully, in
a moment when they are more isolated than we have ever seen
young people before.
Mr. Cicilline. I was a mayor before I came to Congress, and
that was very much the conversation we had in response to gang
violence--this same idea of connecting to something and being a
part of something, often replacing a family organization that
did not exist.
But you made reference, I think, Dr. Nazarian, to the
technology platforms. And I am just wondering what the
panelists think that the technology companies should be doing
in terms of identifying threats, alerting government
authorities, possibly banning or removing content.
It feels like that one of the really big challenges here is
the ease at which information is shared, misinformation, this
ideology, quickly with lots of people. And is it time to impose
a greater responsibility on the technology platforms to play a
more active role in this space?
Dr. Nazarian. If I could add, I mean, just in going back to
the things that are adding to the sensitivity of youth, you
know, even concepts like globalization, multiculturalism, what
they are calling ``Third-Worldism.'' Why is there such a
reaction to nonwhite immigration to America? It is really this
notion that whites are being replaced.
And what I can tell you from my travels around the world,
especially through Europe, is that Europe serves as a
cautionary tale. American white supremacists are looking at
Europe, seeing the influx of Muslims because of the Syrian war
and the Iraqi war, looking at migrants coming in from Africa,
and they are being replaced, and their purity and the white
race that they believe in is being invaded and being
disseminated.
So that is first and foremost. We have to keep in mind the
connectivity of these threats and how they see it. So Europe
serves as that.
Going now to the platforms, we talk about the
responsibility of platforms to self-govern. They know how to do
it; they are just refusing do it right now. And it takes all of
us--our legislators, the private sector, NGO's like us--to bear
pressure to say: You cannot only react after things happen,
after horrific acts happen. You have to be able to do it
beforehand and help us do it together through gathering data
and others.
Mr. Cicilline. Yes. And I also think it is obviously not
helpful when we have political or civic leaders in the country
that are using language that dehumanizes refugees or immigrants
and speak about invasions and infestations and all of that kind
of stuff.
I just have a minute left, so I would like to ask each of
you, what is the one most important thing Congress can do right
now to respond to this urgent challenge?
Mr. Picciolini. You know, I would say we really need to
treat this in two ways: one, as a national security issue, but
also as a public health crisis.
The way to tackle deradicalization is in a public health
way, because ideology really is secondary. People find their
way to the ideologies, and it becomes the green light to be
angry or the permission slip. So if we want to solve this for
future generations, we really need to focus on social services,
early childhood education, and mental healthcare.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
Dr. Miller.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. If I could pick one thing, I would urge
you to think long-term about capacity-building and expertise.
And I would just say that, you know, the reason why I am
here today is because this government invested in me, funded me
to go to graduate school with a Javits Fellowship, paid with a
National Science Foundation, Title VI money, Title VIII money.
All of my graduate school was funded through, you know, acts of
this government to fund me.
It took 22 years for that expertise to come back to this
room and help, I hope, in this way, so it is a long game to
invest in that way, but I hope that those investments pay off
over time.
And I think that we cannot just think of this as a short-
term, you know, how to shuffle money around and get immediate
expertise in kind of a whack-a-mole type of way. We have to
think long-term about what capacity might we need 20 years from
now to solve whatever terrorist threats exist then. And I hope
that long-term investments can be made.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Dr. Miller. I think we feel good
about the investment that was made.
Mr. Cicilline. Absolutely.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Thank you. I hope so.
Mr. Deutch. Mr. Zeldin, you are recognized.
Mr. Zeldin. I thank the chairs for hosting today's hearing.
This is an important conversation for us to be having in
Congress.
I appreciate the witnesses for being here.
In our country, the way that we define words, terms are
important to help us to talk to each other as opposed to past
each other. I know that the ADL has definitions for the terms
``white nationalism,'' ``white supremacy.'' I do not know if
all three witnesses agree with those terms as defined by ADL or
if you had any other definition. To Dr. Miller or Mr.
Picciolini.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I prefer the term ``white supremacist
extremism,'' myself, as the broadest overarching term. I think
that ``white nationalism'' is a term that can soften the impact
and that has also been used, deliberately, internally, to kind
of soften it by making it seem as if this is overblown
patriotism.
But I also think that it is not a good exercise, in
general, for scholars or policymakers to spend too much time
fighting over terminology and getting too caught up in those
debates. I think that if we know what we are talking about, we
can agree to disagree on the terminology.
Mr. Zeldin. But, generally, do--I guess the question is if
you agree with the ADL's definition. I was not asking for you
to disagree unless you--I mean, I guess you do.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes. Right. Sorry.
Mr. Picciolini. I do not know the exact definitions, but,
generally, having done a lot of work with----
Dr. Nazarian. I have them. Yes.
Mr. Picciolini [continuing]. The ADL----
Dr. Nazarian. Happy to share it.
Mr. Zeldin. Dr. Nazarian, please.
Dr. Nazarian. So the ADL defines ``white supremacy'' as the
collection of movements sharing one or more of the following
key tenets: No. 1, white people should have dominance over
people of other ethnic and racial backgrounds, especially in
places where they may coexist; two, white people should live by
themselves in whites-only society; three, white people have
their own culture that is superior to other cultures; and,
four, white people are genetically superior to other people.
So they believe that the white race is in danger of
extinction due to a rising flood of non-whites, as we talked a
little bit about, kind of, their concerns.
Mr. Picciolini. I would agree with that.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I agree.
Mr. Zeldin. OK. I was not trying to provoke a disagreement.
Dr. Nazarian. Yes, yes, yes. No.
Mr. Zeldin. What is interesting in our country is the term
``nationalism'' gets discussed as well and used with a
different definition of ``white nationalism.'' Do any of you
want to offer a definition of what ``nationalism'' is?
Mr. Picciolini. I would just say that white supremacists
have always tried to find softer marketing terms and buzzwords.
``White nationalist,'' ``alt-right'' are their terms to make
them seem less racist.
But if I were to define ``nationalism,'' I would say that
the difference between ``nationalism'' and ``patriotism'' is,
being proud of your country and being a patriot means you want
to share with that other people, while being nationalist means
you want to be exclusive and not really share those resources
or talents with others.
Mr. Zeldin. Does the ADL have a definition for
``nationalism''? I do not know the answer to that.
Dr. Nazarian. I do not believe so, not that I have in front
of me.
But I think, I mean, in general, this idea of love for
country, I think, as Mr. Picciolini referenced, is one that you
share a pride, versus one that is exclusionary and is against
the interest of others, so it is much more of an exclusionary
feeling.
Mr. Zeldin. You know, it is interesting, I mean, social
media cuts both ways, especially anonymously, you could say. I
mean, the lowest common denominator of the way either your
internal compass is or you view others, people can be the worst
forms of themselves anonymously.
Some people have, I have seen on social media, declared
themselves nationalists, and then when you look at the way they
are commenting on issues, they do not seem to meet the
definition of white supremacy or white nationalism. And people
who are saying that they are nationalists--so what is
interesting, one definition that gets used is ``identification
with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially
to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other
nations.''
Dr. Nazarian. Yes.
Mr. Zeldin. And what is interesting about this widely used
definition for ``nationalist'' is that people then see the
definition and then they call themselves a nationalist, not
that they are excluding a specific person based off of race or
religion, that they believe that they are supporting their
country and saying that we should prioritize our own interests
versus others. And then if that person is white, then they get
called a white nationalist, and then they end up becoming a
white supremacist.
And it is just very interesting, what I have seen on social
media, where people are declaring themselves to be nationalists
but they do not seem to be violent, they do not seem to express
any type of hate toward people of other races, religions,
genders, and that list that goes on.
But I appreciate you taking the time. This is something it
is hard to do justice for in 5 minutes. But, you know, our
country on this topic does need to do a better job
communicating with each other to make progress.
And, once again, thank you to the chairs for hosting
today's hearing.
Mr. Deutch. Thanks, Mr. Zeldin.
Mr. Malinowski, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
A couple of issues I wanted to ask you all about.
The question of whether we should be designating groups as
terrorist organizations often comes up. And it is, I think
understandably, very controversial with regard to domestic
groups, even if they have international connections.
But I wanted to ask you, in particular, about the practical
merits or disadvantages of designation of foreign-based white
supremacist terrorist organizations. Would there be practical
benefits? Is that something that you would recommend? If not,
why not?
Dr. Nazarian. If I may respond, we at the ADL are looking
at that question right now, and what we can say today is that
we really encourage both the State Department and Congress to
seriously examine that question. We think it is worthy of
examination. We know, as I mentioned in my testimony, Canada
and the U.K. have done so. And I think it is really warranted
to look at it closely and make sure that the designations fit
the criteria the State Department has already set up.
Mr. Malinowski. Right. So it could prohibit material
support. It would potentially help our law enforcement agencies
track movement of people fighting for an organization based in
Europe--tools that do not really exist right now----
Dr. Nazarian. Right now.
Mr. Malinowski [continuing]. Because----
Dr. Nazarian. Correct.
Mr. Malinowski. Yes. OK.
A separate issue that Chairman Rose also mentioned, others
referred to: the whole problem of online radicalization.
When we talk about this problem and the role that the
social media companies play, we generally focus on deleting bad
content and removing bad people from the online platforms. I
think it is partly because we all understand that. You do not
need any technical expertise to understand the importance of
getting rid of something that is bad. But it is also whack-a-
mole. I doubt we will ever get to 100 percent, given the
billions of people who exist on these platforms. There are new
platforms that people move to.
The question that I have been thinking about much more is
not just what to do about bad content but what to do about the
engine that promotes that bad content. If somebody goes on the
Daily Stormer website or watches some Azad Brigade videos, what
is likely to happen on their YouTube feed? What are they going
to start seeing?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Recommended content.
Mr. Malinowski. Recommended content.
Now, the social media companies argue, I think
understandably, that they are not liable for the content that
we post. If I libel you on Facebook, I am liable for that, not
Facebook.
But would you agree that if Facebook or YouTube or
Instagram is promoting content, writing an algorithm that
causes that content to show up in my social media because they
have guessed that I might be interested in it, that they are,
in fact, more liable than they would be for the creation of the
content itself? And should we do something about that?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I believe that the recommender systems
and the algorithms are a huge problem and that we need pressure
on these companies to make changes.
Mr. Malinowski. And what changes would you suggest they
make and what sorts of pressure? Should we, for example, look
at Section 230 with regard to immunity for at least
algorithmically promoted content?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. So some of what--I mean, we know, for
example, Dylann Roof has been very clear about his
radicalization possibly starting with a Google search. And
Google has made changes in the way that those searches work
without actual legislative pressure. But if those kinds of
changes do not come about, I think we do need legislation that
would pressure it.
Mr. Malinowski. Would you agree?
Mr. Picciolini. I would agree. I think that these companies
are a lot like countries, where they have the GDP and the size
of--you know, bigger than most countries. But I also want to
caution that these groups, these individuals in extremist
movements move so fast that it is difficult to, from 1 day to
the next, know exactly what they are doing without a focus.
Mr. Malinowski. Right.
Mr. Picciolini. You know, I think that the technology
companies do have a responsibility in terms of the algorithms
that are promoting this radicalizing material, absolutely.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you.
One final question. You spoke, Dr. Miller-Idriss, about the
anti-immigration aspect of the ideology. And, obviously,
immigration policy is something we all debate. We have very
different views, legitimate different views--should we build a
wall, not build a wall, border security, immigration reform.
But setting aside those legitimate differences, should any
politician, candidate, officeholder use the phrase ``immigrant
invasion''?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. No, they should not.
Mr. Picciolini. Twenty-five years ago, I wrote a song about
immigrant invasion that, years later, Dylann Roof posted the
lyrics to online. And I was just an insignificant 17-year-old
skinhead at the time, so, certainly, people with responsibility
for their words have more of a responsibility.
Mr. Malinowski. That is the rhetoric of terrorism. Would
you agree?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes, it is.
Dr. Nazarian. Absolutely. Absolutely.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Malinowski.
Ms. Jackson Lee, you are recognized.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me thank all of you for your presence.
Mr. Chairman, thank you--Chairmen,--persons, plural--for
this kind of meaningful and potent meeting.
Let me ask each of you on a ``yes'' or ``no,'' do you
consider racism, white nationalism a national security threat?
Each witness, just answer ``yes'' or ``no.''
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Yes.
Mr. Picciolini. Yes.
Dr. Nazarian. Yes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. One of the best feelings that I have had
is--I will give two. I know my time is running. One was in high
school with my best friend, who happened to be white and
Jewish. I guess I just saw him in his role as a fellow
traveler. It was a good feeling. I guess if we had to do it
scientifically, there were good feelings out of that
friendship. We liked the same things; we liked student
government. And so good things always seem to happen when we
were working together.
Another sense of good feeling--and this is not a partisan
statement--but when, in my party, I see the big tent with so
many different people and we are all together.
Tragically, another feeling of unity and being an American
is in tragedy. I will take the Mother Emanuel killing. And it
was in a huge stadium, the funeral of one of the persons. But
everybody from the community came. There was not a respective
color or creed. And we were together, embracing each other.
And I think you understand what I am saying. There is
actually a physical feeling of goodness that we are connected,
that we are one and the same.
So let me just ask this question to Mr.--if I have it--
Picciolini.
In 2017, reports said that Americans who identify as white
and Christian has dropped below 50 percent. In 2018, it was
reported that there were fewer births among whites than deaths.
The report stated that deaths now outnumber births among white
people in more than half the States in the country.
Are these demographic changes being used by white
nationalists, No. 1? And are they finding success in recruiting
based on these demographic changes?
Mr. Picciolini.
Mr. Picciolini. Yes, they are using exactly what you
mentioned as fearmongering.
But what I would even caution is, 20 years down the road,
that as our climate crisis ramps up, that we are going to see a
refugee crisis like we have never seen before, and at that
point we will see this rhetoric ramp up. And I think that that
is something we must get ahead of now.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Secondarily, you used the word
``education.'' I will ask all three of you this question. For a
period of time, the history of African-Americans, people of
color were literally removed from the elementary and middle
school educational curriculum.
What does that do, when--we saw that video that went viral.
I just--I cried. The little 2-year-olds running toward each
other. If you have not seen it, pull it up and feel good.
But the point is that we do not bring our children up to
appreciate--let me do this quickly, since I see my time.
The other is, I asked the FBI this morning--we were in a
FISA hearing, which has to do with various documents submitted
to a FISA court and the international terrorism utilized after
9/11. But what I tried to glean from this individual was what
tools do we need to give them for domestic terrorism.
And so, in the answer, tell me: Would it not be important
for the FBI to have tools that refer directly to domestic
terrorism, as we have had with foreign operatives? We cannot
use those. Those are foreign operatives. We cannot spy on our
citizens in the same way. But I believe there should be a
domestic terrorism with civil liberties and civil rights
involved, the structure, but in the DOJ.
So if you three could answer the education and the
enforcement part of it.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. On the second question, yes, I believe
that we need to understand homegrown violent extremists as
operating across the spectrum, domestic and international, in
ways that our current definitions do not allow for and that
hampers our ability to enhance our national security.
On the education question, I would go on far too long. I
just want to say, I absolutely agree. I think this starts very
early. And we are talking about preventative work, you know,
cross-cultural understanding, empathy, openness to difference,
and a wide variety of other outcomes that are just--that we are
failing at right now.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Picciolini.
Mr. Picciolini. Yes, I would just say that our resources
right now are focused in a different direction. There have been
groups disbanded even as far back as 2006 that called out this
problem that were disbanded and defunded. An organization that
I co-founded was also rescinded funding for an online
intervention program. So I think that there needs to be a focus
on this.
As far as education, yes, absolutely, the pre-
radicalization starts then. And it could be an extremist
behavior like crime, drugs, prostitution, something like that.
Those are all extremist manifestations. Or it could be flying
to Syria or flying to the Ukraine and joining a neo-Nazi group.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Dr. Nazarian.
Dr. Nazarian. I can tell you that ADL is the largest
trainer of law enforcement in America of any nongovernmental
organization. So we are training law enforcement
representatives day-in and day-out exactly on these issues:
what white supremacists looks like, what is their symbology,
what is the ideology behind them.
And we also happen to be one of the largest purveyors of
anti-bias education in public schools in America. Over a
million and a half students are educated by ADL on a day-in and
day-out basis.
So, absolutely, on both those issues, we feel they are very
important, and we have to expand them. We have to inoculate our
communities, we have to inoculate our children. And we also
have to give the tools and the knowledge to law enforcement to
be able to understand and recognize what is going on in
communities and to help prevent them. So absolutely.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
And I just want to put on the record that I did not--is
that 8chan--and I will not have time to answer that question--
but within the construct of civil liberties, First Amendment,
site flight that have to be addressed by the U.S. Congress. And
they were one of the motivators of some of the horrors of some
of the perpetrators of the most heinous mass shootings that we
have had.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee.
Mr. Green, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Green of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank
all of the chairpersons as well.
I would like to acknowledge the words of Emily Dickinson.
She reminds us that ``a word is dead when it is said, some say.
I say it just begins to live that day.''
And I call these words to our attention because it is my
belief that the tone and tenor is usually set at the top--the
captain of the football team, the CEO of the corporation, the
head of the Nation. And I am concerned when I read in the
intelligence that has been accorded us that, soon after the
March 2019 attack at Christchurch, New Zealand, President Trump
expressed doubt that white nationalism was a rising threat
around the world. That caused me a good deal of consternation.
Quickly respond, if you would, to the words of the person
who sets the tone and tenor.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. I believe that it is essential for us to
have bipartisan support across the board to see white
nationalist terrorism, white supremacist extremism as a
critical threat to the Nation. So, yes, from the top down, but
in every local community as well, from leaders and across the
board.
Mr. Picciolini. This is neither a Democratic or a
Republican problem. This is a problem of American national
security.
And I would say that, just back to what I said earlier,
there were words that I wrote 25 years ago that manifested in
death with somebody like Dylann Roof, and we must be
responsible for the words that we say. Because while most
people may not act on those words, we know that there are some
people who will. We have seen the effects of that. So I think,
certainly, we must all measure our words when it comes to
something so sensitive.
Dr. Nazarian. We feel the bully pulpit is tremendously
important. And all our leaders, political and otherwise, need
to be held accountable and responsible for the words that they
share and also for standing up and calling things out exactly
as they see it. So words matter. And I think all our leaders
should be unequivocal about what is going on in our country
today.
Mr. Green of Texas. Were there any nice people among the
folk who were screaming, ``Blood and soil,'' ``Jews will not
replace us,'' at Charlottesville? Any nice people among them?
Mr. Picciolini. Sir, in my job, I have to believe that
there were nice people there because it is my job to try and
pull them out. However, I think the statement of ``very fine
people there'' was a very dangerous one because it did
equivocate two things that were not equal.
Mr. Green of Texas. Finally, this. I have lived a long
time. Sometimes I think I have lived too long, to be quite
honest. I have seen what racism can do to people. And I marvel
now at how I have lived long enough to see the Klan come out of
the robe, take the hoods off, march the streets openly and
notoriously. I, quite frankly, 20 years ago would not have
prognosticated that such would be the case.
Something has happened to give them reason to believe that
they can show their faces. Please--I have 1 minute left--what
happened?
Dr. Miller-Idriss. A lot of things have happened that have
brought, I would say, the underlying racist, you know, things
that people used to hide, out. So it is not just the fringes
coming; it is that the racism has moved more into the
mainstream.
And I think we are seeing that the way that social media
operates, the kind of rhetoric that we hear from political
leaders and in the media has legitimized and reinforced those
words. And I think the, kind of, manifestos and the global
circulation of videos seems to empower these people as well.
Mr. Green of Texas. I know that you all have salient
answers, but I have to ask this question quickly. Do you
believe that those who tolerate bigotry and hate perpetuate it?
Toleration; perpetuation? Acceptance; perpetuation?
Please respond.
Mr. Picciolini. If I might, there are two things that
extremists love, and that is silence and violence. When we
ignore them, they grow. When we are violent against them, they
use that as a victim narrative. And if we are quiet about what
is happening in the world today, if we are not speaking truth
to it, it will grow. It will fester, like it has for 400 years.
And we have an opportunity, I think, right now, as a
learning moment, to really acknowledge the problems, the
failures that we have made, and work toward a solution that
works for everybody.
Mr. Green of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You have been
more than kind.
Thank you.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Green. I appreciate the
questions.
I neglected to ask unanimous consent that you and Ms.
Clarke be able to ask questions as members of the full
committee.
Without objection.
Ms. Clarke, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Clarke. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank both the
chairman and the ranking member for holding this very important
hearing.
And I just want to get some feedback on a number of the
questions that were provided to us, because you have given a
lot of really important testimony.
Mr. Picciolini, I am really interested in the
deradicalization process. Were there certain messages or
approaches that were most effective in your deradicalization
process? And, in your opinion, which aspects of current
deradicalization efforts work, and which do not?
And I heard you mention about, sort of, the early childhood
education piece, but you were caught at a later stage in life,
so that would be very informative.
Mr. Picciolini. You know, I do a lot of listening rather
than debating or arguing, and what I learn from listening is
what I call potholes. And those are the things that people run
into in their life's journey. It could be trauma, it can be
poverty, it can be joblessness. Even privilege can keep us in a
very isolated bubble.
And what I do is I fill those potholes in. I work with
social services, psychiatrists and other mental health
professionals, job trainers, to really build resilience in
people, without addressing the ideology.
The way I address the ideology is through introducing them
and immersing them with people that they think that they hate.
Now, that is a process that happened to me. I received
compassion from the people I least deserved it from at a time
that I least deserved it. And for me, that was the most
powerful, transformative thing, because I had never in my life
had a meaningful interaction with the people I thought I hated.
I had been brought in at 14.
It is certainly not the responsibility of people of color
or potential victims to do that, which I think means we just
need to be nice to everybody all the time, because we never
know who we are dealing with.
But the most powerful thing for me is actually going
through that process of human resilience-building rather than
debate.
Ms. Clarke. And how do we engage and educate influencers
within the communities that white nationalist terrorist groups
target to help counter-message extremist propaganda?
Mr. Picciolini. Is that for me?
Ms. Clarke. Yes.
Mr. Picciolini. Well, I think we just need to acknowledge
that we have a problem, first. I think we are still debating
about if this is a problem.
Once we acknowledge that it is a problem, I also think that
we need institutional and systemic changes. Because the way it
is happening right now, what I do as far as deradicalization
work, it is a Band-Aid. You know, we have to treat it like
polio. I treat the sick, but we also have to inoculate the
population from getting sick. And that is through systemic and
institutional change. Otherwise, we just have a factory where
we are churning out racists all the time.
Ms. Clarke. Very well.
And then I wanted to ask about women. We oftentimes hear
about white males in this dynamic, but in some of the, sort of,
visuals that I have seen, I have seen women in photos that
espouse similar ideologies.
Is there a place for women in the contemporary white
nationalist movement? And if so, what does that look like?
And that is for the entire panel.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. We are seeing increasing participation
of women in white supremacist groups, both in the U.S. and in
Europe, even in violent fringe groups and even in terrorist
violence. They are still, by far, the minority compared to men
in terms of violence, but they are engaging.
They are also engaging on channels like YouTube, setting up
channels that promote the ideology, that draw people in, and
that kind of soften it a little bit, and are supporters in that
way--enablers, I would say.
So I think they play a very important role and have been
overlooked.
And the other thing I will say is that mothers play a very
important role in some of the deradicalization work. And we
have seen that with ISIS and foreign fighters--mothers groups
and parenting groups. And I think we could see a similar kind
of wave of parenting programs in the U.S. around white
supremacist extremism as well.
Dr. Nazarian. And I can just add that, internationally, we
are also seeing a rise in the terms of the role of women,
because the issues that, you know, inflame them, such as anti-
immigrant sentiment, cut across all gender lines. So it is not
an issue that is more male or female. It is that they are
feeling that their culture or their beliefs are being overrun
by immigrants bringing different beliefs, different religions.
So it definitely goes across lines, and you see women also
being much more animated and much angrier about the fact that
their white culture is being diluted, that they are being
replaced, internationally as well. So, unfortunately, that goes
across all genders.
Mr. Picciolini. And just very briefly, women are being used
as mouthpieces, as recruitment vessels. They are often the ones
tasked with doing the podcasts, making the videos, because
women attract more men to the organization.
And I will just point out, there was a report yesterday of
a young woman who was arrested with an AR-15 in her trunk who
had made threats against shooting 500 people and had drawn
swastikas on her stuff.
So this is something that we will start to see mimic ISIS
in the way that that happened as well.
Ms. Clarke. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate your
indulgence. I yield back.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Ms. Clarke.
And Ms. Omar, who is a member of the full committee, has
also asked to ask questions. And, without objection, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Omar. Wonderful. To the co-chairs of this committee, I
really do appreciate the opportunity to be allowed to join you
all.
And to the testifiers, thank you so much for taking the
time to have a really critical conversation on the ideology
known as white nationalism.
The goal of these terrorists in this particular ideology is
articulated after each attack, and it is one that is as
consistent as it is unhinged: to create a white ethno-State
that excludes religious, ethnic, and racial minorities.
Far-right terrorists were linked to every single extremist-
related murder in 2018, the most in any year since 1995,
according to the Anti-Defamation League. The Southern Poverty
Law Center reports a 50-percent increase in white nationalist
groups from 2017 to 2018. I will not speculate on why that has
happened. And according to the SPLC, 81 people were killed by
those influenced by the alt-right since 2014.
So I will repeat something I have said before; it is a
statement of fact: White men, driven by hateful ideology of
white nationalism, are committing the overwhelming majority of
extremist attacks in this country. And we are not doing enough
to confront it.
This is not an indictment of all white men, just like the
despicable acts of few al-Qaida terrorists is not an indictment
of all Muslims. It is, rather, a call for action. If we are
going to take serious the threat of terrorism, we must truly do
everything we can to minimize that threat.
So I apologize if I mis-say your name. Mr. Picciolini?
Mr. Picciolini. Very good.
Ms. Omar. OK. I wanted to ask you something that was
written in your testimony. You said, ``Adequate terrorism laws
already exist to thwart and prosecute terrorists, as do plenty
of capable and talented people who are ready to defend us from
the threat of harm, but the current counterterrorism mandate
does not provide for the proper focus, resources, and funding,
or, in some cases, the correct holistic approach to effectively
counter terrorism.''
I worry about that too, a lot. Of course I agree that white
nationalism should be considered terrorism, but I am concerned
about repeating some of the policy mistakes we have made in the
so-called global war on terror since 9/11.
I have been working to get more transparency on the
Terrorist Screening Data base. For example, I do not see a
solution to white nationalism that is simply to just add more
people onto that list. We have gone down the wrong road, and if
we start talking about taking Klansmen to Guantanamo, what are
we really saying?
I believe in restorative justice. Some have faulted me for,
you know, talking about ways that we should figure out how to
rehabilitate people and how that is actually one of the
strongest counterterrorism acts that we could deploy. I believe
it is a moral thing, but I also feel like, again, it is one of
the best ways to fight terrorism and extremism.
And so I would love for you to sort of walk us through what
are some of the holistic approaches we should take. And could
that be something that could be deployed even abroad as we
fight terrorism as well?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes. Thank you. That is an important
question. And I would say, as far as the holistic approach, it
is more toward prevention. So, you know, making sure that young
people feel like they have agency, like they are amplified
through their passions, so that they are not alienated in
youth. Because what I have found is that, you know, people are
not born Nazis or racists; they learn it. And they can also
unlearn it as well. But it takes repairing the foundation
underneath them and building human resilience to do that.
But in terms of the more holistic approach, it really is
about prevention and inoculating the population. We cannot just
focus on the national security side if we are not ever going to
turn the flow of the tap off to create more of these
extremists.
So I think that we have to have more inclusive programs in
school. We have to start teaching our history the right way,
you know, not only about, you know, 1619 but also that we are
teaching the Civil War different in different parts of the
country, where in some places it is about northern aggression
and in some places it is about slavery. We do not even have
that sort of consistency.
So, in terms of a holistic approach, it really is about
looking at our policies and our institutional, in many cases,
racism to try and make sure that we are creating an equitable
foundation for young people moving forward.
But as far as holistic as well as national security, it
would be providing solutions for people who want to disengage
to disengage and be able to do that. But, certainly, you know,
there is a national security threat that should be dealt with
with policy.
Ms. Omar. I appreciate that.
With that, I yield back my time.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Ms. Omar.
Ms. Jackson Lee had asked unanimous consent to enter three
articles into the record: a PBS article, ``White Christians Are
Now a Minority of the U.S. Population''; a New York Times
article, ``Fewer Births than Deaths Among Whites in a Majority
of U.S. States''; and an ABC News article, ``Experts Dissect
Reasons Why Mass Shooters Target Houses of Worship.''
Without objection, they will be entered into the record.
[The articles follow:]
Mr. Deutch. And, finally, I will acknowledge myself.
I am really grateful for your being here today.
I want to talk about two things.
Mr. Picciolini, when--you have all talked about the
responsibility that platforms have to do a better job. We have
this sense that there is a Facebook page and people go to the
Facebook page and they get radicalized. And that is not how it
works. They are drawn in, Mr. Picciolini, right?
And it is through the social media that we get access, and
then they are given the link to get to the dark web, the 8chan,
or they will get to the other site where they can watch--it is
not a cleaned-up version--where they can watch people out
screaming horrible things on video, shooting off their AR-15s,
talking about what they want to do to blacks and Jews and
Muslims.
Is that not right?
Mr. Picciolini. That is correct. They have what they call
gatekeepers, who are very, kind of, benign, not very outwardly
white supremacists. And then they kind of send them into a
stepped process, purity spiral, where they eventually get into
Holocaust-denial videos and things like that.
Mr. Deutch. Right. And so what should we be--I mean, I
think we need to stop tiptoeing around this issue. We do this
nicely, but the fact is, there is a way in. And if there is a
way in, there is a way to block the way in, is not there? So
what more, specifically, should we be doing?
And I will ask all the witnesses.
Dr. Miller-Idriss.
Dr. Miller-Idriss. Well, I think there are a few things.
One, I think we need to have many more of these kinds of
conversations, both on the record, off the record, also with
experts on online radicalization and experts who have been, you
know, recently deradicalized through online radicalization.
I think we need to figure out ways to change the
recommendation systems, those recommender systems. But I also
think we need to figure out ways to fund more proactive
approaches to--you know, you can game the algorithms, too, by
funding people who are putting positive content on there so
that you get more positive content showing up in the feeds,
right, instead of just----
Mr. Deutch. Yes. If someone is searching--if I may, if
someone is searching for hate-filled videos and there is
research that shows--and Mr. Picciolini's own experience that
shows where that can lead, then maybe the right algorithm is
not the one that takes them to even more violent, hate-filled
videos, but maybe it is the opposite direction.
Is that not right, Mr. Picciolini.
Mr. Picciolini. That is right. And there is so much content
being uploaded, that it is really relied on AI to make those
decisions right now.
Mr. Deutch. Right.
Mr. Picciolini. But I would also caution, too, that so much
of this propaganda is coming from outside of the U.S. and being
bolstered--these messages here, domestically, are being
bolstered by, you know, places in Eastern Europe and in Russia
in troll farms. So it is going to be difficult, because they
are just marketing methods.
And they have also created their own platforms. So we can
de-platform them all we want, but they have now created their
own social networks and encrypted platforms.
Mr. Deutch. And you talked about VKontakte. What is
happening abroad on the social media and the thousands of
people going to Ukraine, Dr. Nazarian, can you just touch on
that for a second and how social media and actual on-the-ground
violence come together?
Dr. Nazarian. What we do see is actually the terminology
and symbology they are sharing with one another. So we are
seeing the use of, in this cross-pollinization--and I talked
about it--the use of terminology from Ukraine penetrating to
America and vice versa.
I did want to say that--look, the terms of service of the
platforms have to be more clearly adhered to. They are
responsible, the platforms themselves, to make sure that the
rules they have are enforced. And they are not doing a good
enough job, or at scale. So there is room for improvement
there.
And we would also, at ADL, really like to see better
governance. We want to see them scheduling external,
independent audits of their work. They are not really telling
us how much information is coming in in terms of data that is
being flagged. We do not really know how much reporting has
gone on. All they are telling us are things that they are
moving on, that is actionable.
So better transparency in terms of how much reporting of
hate language is coming in, we do not really have that as well,
and I think that is a problem.
Mr. Deutch. We should have better transparency.
And then one other--you mentioned online gaming.
Dr. Nazarian. Yes.
Mr. Deutch. There is a tendency of some to blame video
games for violence. That is not what I want to talk about.
Dr. Nazarian. No.
Mr. Deutch. I want to talk about the actual conversations
that are taking place, that presumably those online gaming
companies have some access to? How does that work, Mr.
Picciolini?
Mr. Picciolini. Yes. So what is happening is, when young
people or anybody, really, is playing a multiplayer online
game, they are wearing headsets and they are usually playing
with multiple people. And what happens--and I have witnessed
it--is a recruiter will say something like the ``N'' word or
make a joke and gauge who laughs, who pushes up against it, and
who does not say anything. Well, they know they can go after
the people who have laughed. Even if it was a nervous laugh
from a 10-year-old, they know that they have an in there, and
they send them down a spiral.
But it is also happening in places like depression forums
and autism forums online, where they are going there to look
for----
Mr. Deutch. Are those monitored? Is there a way to address
that?
Mr. Picciolini. Well, you know, I think that there are
probably moderators for all of those rooms, but I do not think
that they would be skilled in identifying----
Mr. Deutch. Is there a way that AI could be employed to
identify those sorts of conversations?
Dr. Nazarian. We do know that they are unregulated
completely. So the fact is that we, as legislators, as people,
have to look at these sectors, and that they need to be better
regulated. And we know for a fact right now they are not
regulated.
Mr. Deutch. And, finally, I just want to end with this.
There has been conversation about the mainstreaming of
ideology. And we started by talking about the importance of
identifying white nationalist terrorism, white supremacist
ideology--a discussion of language.
But it is not the mainstreaming of ideology, is it? It is
the mainstreaming of what is that ideology. It is the
mainstreaming of racism and the mainstreaming of anti-Semitism
and Islamophobia and xenophobia.
And when you talk about David Duke taking off his hood and
entering politics, it is not that we should then start
identifying the language that identifies him as a white
supremacist. It is any time any one of us ever uses the
language of racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred,
isn't it? And do not we have an obligation--is it too much to
ask that that language just never be accepted?
Dr. Nazarian. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Picciolini. You are absolutely correct. Yes.
Mr. Deutch. I am really grateful for the three of you
coming and for this hearing and the thoughtful exchanges that
you had with my colleagues.
I thank the members of both subcommittees for being here
today.
Members may have some additional questions for you, and we
ask our witnesses to please respond to those questions in
writing.
I would ask my colleagues that any witness questions for
the hearing be submitted to the subcommittee clerks within 5
business days.
[The information referred to follows:]
Mr. Deutch. And, with that, without objection, the hearing
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the subcommittees were
adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
STATMENTS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
INFORMATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]