Our intelligence when it came to combating terrorism. What i can say with confidence is that when it comes to our domestic operations, the concerns that people have back home in the United States of america, that we do not surveil the American People or people within the United States, that there are a lot of checks and balances in place designed to avoid a surveillance state. There have been times where the procedures, because these are human endeavors, have not worked the way they should, and we had to tighten them up. And i think there are legitimate questions that have been raised about the fact that as Technology Advances and capabilities grow, it may be that the laws that are currently in place are not sufficient to guard against the dangers of us being able to track so much. When it comes to intelligence gathering internationally, our focus is on counter terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, cyber security, Core National security interests of the United States. But what is true is is that the United States has enormous capabilities when it comes to intelligence. One way to think about it is in the same way that our military capabilities are significantly greater than many other countries, the same is true for intelligence capabilities. S so even though we may have the same goals, our means are significantly greater. And i can give assurances to the publics in europe and around the world that were not going around snooping at peoples emails or listening to their phone calls. What we are trying to do is to target very specifically areas of concern. Having said that, what ive said domestically and what ive said International Audiences is we have changes in technology, we have the growth of our capability capabilities. If our attitude is because we can do it we should go ahead and do it, then we may not be, you know, addressing some of the legitimate concerns and dangers that exist any time were talking about intelligence gathering and surveillance. So what ive asked my National Security team to do, as well as independent persons who are wellknown lawyers, civil libertarians, privacy experts to do is to review everything that were doing with the instructions to them that we have to balance the ends with the means. And just because we can do something doesnt mean we should do it. And there may be situations in which were gathering information just because we can but doesnt help us with our National Security, but does raise questions in terms of whether were tipping over into being too intrusive with respect to the you know, the interactions of other governments. And that is something that we are currently reviewing carefully. We are consulting with the eu in this process. We are consulting with other countries in this process. And finding out from them whether there are areas of specific concern and trying to align what we do in a way that, i think, alleviates some of the public concerns that people may have. But this is always going to be some theres going to be some balancing that takes place on these issues. To sum up some of the folks who have been most greatly offended publicly, we know privately engage in the same activities directed at us or use information that weve obtained to protect their people. And we recognize that, but i think all of us have to take a very thoughtful approach to this problem. And im the first one to acknowledge that given advances technology and the fact that so much of our information flow today is through the internet, through wireless, that the risks of abuse are greater than they had been in the past. Now, with respect to sweden, i havent had a chance to Wander Around stockholm as much as i would like, it is a gorgeous country. What i know about sweden i think offers us some good lessons. Number one, the work youve done on energy, i think is something that the United States can and will learn from because every country in the world right now has to recognize that if were going to continue to grow, improve our standard of living, while maintaining a sustainable planet, then were going to change our patterns of energy use. Sweden i think is well far ahead of many other countries. Sweden also has been able to have a robust market economy while recognizing that there are some investments in education or infrastructure or research that are important and theres no contradiction between making public investments and being a Firm Believer in free markets. And thats a debate and a discussion that we often have in the United States. I have to say that if i were here in europe, i would probably be considered right in the middle, maybe center left, maybe center right depending on the country. In the United States, sometimes the names im called are quite different. And i think a third observation and final observation i would make is though i know that im sure fredrik doesnt feel this as hes engaging in difficult debates here, i do get a sense that the politics in sweden right now involve both the ruling party and the opposition engaged in a respectful and rational debate thats based on fact s and issues, and i think that kind of recognition that people can have political differences but were all trying to achieve the same goals. Thats something that swedes should be proud of and should try to maintain. The first question from the American Press goes to Steve Holland of reuters. Thank you, mr. President. Thank you, sir. Have you made up your mind whether to take action against syria, whether or not you have a congressional resolution approved . Is a strike needed in order to preserve your credibility for when you set these sort of red lines . And were you able to enlist the support of the Prime Minister here for support in syria . Let me unpack the question. First of all, i didnt set a red line. The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 of the worlds population said, the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled syria accountability act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for. And so when i said in a press conference that my calculus about whats happening in syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, i wasnt saying i just kind of made up. I didnt pluck it out of thin air. Theres a reason for it. Thats point number one. Point number two. My credibility is not on the line. The International Communitys credibility is on the line. And america and congress credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these International Norms are important. And when those videos first broke and you saw images of over 400 children subjected to gas, everybody expressed outrage. How can this happen in this modern world . Well, it happened because a government chose to deploy these Deadly Weapons on civilian populations. And so the question is, how credible is the International Community when it says this is an International Norm that has to be observed . The question is, how credible is congress when it passes a treaty saying we have to forbid the use of chemical weapons . And i do think that we have to act because if we dont, we are effectively saying that even though we may condemn it and issue resolutions and so forth and so on, somebody who is not shamed by resolutions can continue to act with impunity. And those International Norms begin to erode and other d despites and authoritarian regimes can start looking and saying, thats something we can get away with. And that then calls into question other International Norms and laws of war and whether those are going to be enforced. So as i told the Prime Minister, i am very respectful of the u. N. Investigators who went in at great danger to try to gather evidence about what happened. We want more information, not less. But when i said that i have high confidence that chemical weapons were used and that the assad government, through their chain of command, ordered their use, that was based on both public sourcing, intercepts, evidence that we feel very confident about, including samples that had beenest t estested showing from individuals who were there. And im very mindful of the fact that around the world and here in europe in particular there are still memories of iraq and weapons of mass destruction accusations and people being concerned about how accurate this information is. Keep in mind im somebody who opposed the war in iraq and not interested in repeating mistakes of us basing decisions on faulty intelligence. But having done a thorough evaluation of the information that is currently available, i can say with high confidence, chemical weapons were used. And by the way, iran doesnt deny it. Even syria doesnt actually deny they were used, and that is what the u. N. Investigators are supposed to be determining. And frankly, nobody is really disputing the chemical weapons were used. The only remaining dispute is who used them, which is outside the parameters of the u. N. Investigation. So the u. N. Investigation will not be able to answer that preliminarily. Theyre not supposed to. But what we know is is that the opposition doesnt have the capability to deliver weapons on this scale. These weapons are in assads possession. We have intercepts indicating people in the chain of command, both before and after the attacks, with knowledge of these attacks. We can show that the rockets that delivered these chemical weapons went from areas controlled by assad into these areas where the opposition was lodged. And that accumulation of evidence gives us high confidence that assad carried this out. And so the question is, after weve gone through all this, are we going to try to find a reason not to act . And if thats the case, then i think the World Community should admit it, because you can always find a reason not to act. Its a complicated, decision. And an initial response will not solve the underlying tragedy of the civil war in syria, as fredrik mentioned, that will be solved through empventually a transition. But we can send a very clear, strong message against the prohibition or in favor of the prohibition against using chemical weapons. We can change assads calculus about using them again. We can degrade his capabilities so that he does not use them again. And so what im talking about is an action that is limited in time and in scope. Targeted at the specific task of degrading his capabilities and deterring the use of those weapons again and, in the meantime, we will continue to engage the entire International Community in trying to find a solution to the underlying problems, which brings me to the last question. And that is what happens if congress doesnt approve it. I believe that congress will approve it. I believe congress will approve it because i think america recognizes that, as difficult as it is to take any military action, even win as limited as im talking about, even one without boots on the ground, thats a sober decision. But i think america also recognizes that if the International Community fails to maintain certain norms, standards, laws, governing how country interact and how people are treated, that over time, this world becomes less safe, it becomes more dangerous not only for those people who are subjected to these horrible crimes but to all of humanity. And weve seen that happen again and again in our history. And the people of europe are certainly familiar with what happens when the International Community finds excuses not to act. And i would not have taken this before Congress Just as a symbolic gesture. I think its very important that congress say that we mean what we say. And i think we will be stronger as a country in our response if the president and congress does it together. As commander in chief, i always preserve the right and the responsibility to act on behalf of americas National Security. I do not believe that i was required to take this to congress, but i did not take this to Congress Just because its an empty exercise. I think its important to have congress support on it. And the next swedish question goes to that is the president in stockholm with the Prime Minister of sweden, fredrik reinfeldt. He said that we have to act and also defending his use of the socalled red line, saying i didnt use the red line, the world set a red line. Obviously, guys, welcome to squawk on the street, by the way. Im carl quintanilla. One reason, jim, we lost 100 points on the intraday high yesterday. The pingpong continues. Well, i think that no one wants to take action before this that i know. And then Everyone Wants to take action after, as if theres this event. It will be a discrete event and then you go buy them. I think thats a little simplistic but thats what im hearing over and over again. It is possible that is what is, in fact, will take place. He did not answer the question specifically about what he will do if Congress Says we dont endorse bombing. We dont know. Reserves the right as he has been saying for a few days now. Oil and gold historically traded up instantly. Oil comes down. Gold has come down. Maybe gold this time is different. I had a chart last night, i tend not to be chart sorry ended but gold is tending to climb, seasonal. Theres a big strike going on in the south and south africa. So just keep in mind those are the ones to watch. Gold and oil. Those have been the international worry plays. Oil went down very big after libya. Went down very big after iraq. So keep that in mind. Yeah. By the way, were expecting some kind of proposed resolution out of the senate today which would put together some objectives. Likely a 60day deadline, maybe a 30day extension. Kerry and hagel back on the hill again today. The polls continue to show 6 out of 10 americans oppose any action of any kind. Something to watch, obviously. Along with a lot of news. Shares of Dollar General rising in the premarket. Discount retailer reported earnings of 77 cents a share. Revenues exceeding consensus. Samestore sales up 51 helped up demand for tobacco product which they recently added. C consumables at large up. This is the place where the walmart people seem to have gone. There is a trade down in part because, by the way, food stamps. Remember, food stamps have gone up for 2 per year every year since 2008. 46 million people. Food stamps taken by Dollar General because they moved in consumables. Ive got to tell you that is maybe the missing piece of the puzzle about what is going on in this country, whether it be dollar tree, Family Dollar, dollar gen. People are going to these places that just moving to california, one fifth of the country. Theres also a consolidation question around the sector that i continue to hear. Not so much about Dollar General being acquired but perhaps would it consider and maybe well hear something at 10 00, you never know because theres enough investors have asked the question, would it consider acquiring the name most often heard there is Family Dollar. The board of which is up. Is there a willingness on the part of the founding family to sell that company. Would walmart be interested. This is all chatter. Yeah. In walmart . You just mentioned how theyve been would walmart be interested in buying one of the Dollar Stores. That would be breakthrough. Walmart does have sams club. This area is very much in flux because the expansions are radical for these Dollar Stores. People do like them. They added all of these great brands but they also added private label brands. These are cash machines. Walmart, that would be just that would be blow away if they did that. I got to tell you. Who knows. It is, again. I showed you this once gafr. But the chatter continues. Dollar generals call could easily say theres nothing going on whatsoever. Nelson doesnt stop. He gets his man. You can attest to that. They did buy back more stock in the quarter. 200 million versus 20 million. A little more confident in the coming quarter. Still see samestore sales up. People plummeted, Dollar Stores were all going down. You know whats funny, this is a consumable and somewhat hard goods play. Francescas, an apparel play down again. The only apparel play thats working is g3, which is sports apparel. That should help a couple other Companies Involved including pvh. Only one here on the quarter was inventory shrinkage, also known as theft, is on the rise. Also keeping our eye on apple. A couple of big things today. Invite to the event on september 10th has gone out. Its going to be in cooper tin no. 1 00 p. M. Eastern time. A separate invite to an event in beijing. All of the rumor mill is in chatter. The people who had price targets that were cut, cut, cut, now have to raise, raise, raise. Wells fargo going in there and saying, look, there are some real possible earnings growth. Six bucks more because of the flexibility with the carriers. Meanwhile, we still dont get any news. Flexibility with the carriers . Listen,