you can put your money in that fine and be confident that none of it will go to activities prohibited by sharia law which makes some sense. the problem is that these financial institutions have put in place cheviot compliance boards which are staffed by the most reactionary, right-wing, islamofascist in the world. re-signed in our book fibre six of them who had to be removed from the boards because they are on the fbi list and these folks are going to make the decision on where the sharia climbed alliance funding those.

and for a lead there are $800 billion globally and a management buy sharia compliance funds and if they get together with a sovereign walled fun of countries like a tart and kuwait and dubai you could get that up to three and $4 trillion. and not only do these this side or the money is invested in. they also allocated to it and a half percent of your portfolio that has to go to charity like that has to go to charity like muslim tiding only two and half percent and they decided the charities and they're all the hezbollah terrorist fronts. in fact, the record other designated charities that was subsequently busted on to the bush administration is enormous and if you run afoul of sharia law like a trucking firm and when they put things in your truck you have to pay 7.5%, they also decided that money goes. now in this book in every chapter and the and we have

something called the action agenda that tells you how to fight back and here there is something specific. the former undersecretary of defense, head of the center for security policy, has launched a lawsuit against aig. is really cool. he says that aig syria compliance fund is an act of the government which now owns 80% of aig. and as result violates the separation of church and state because it is government funding institution of religion. [applause] now isn't that cool? and have lawsuits needs money and support and it needs friends and, please, consult the part of the book where i give the place to send all of that. so listen, we are at a crucial crossroads and barack obama has lost 12 points of job approval in the last 12 weeks.

[applause] gallon has some dropping from 7258, rasmussen has him dropping from 65 to 53. i refer -- i prefer rasmussen but the point is eavesdropping and when he drops to 53 and 52 that is the share of the vote he got in the election so at that point he is actively shedding boats, people that voted him and say they now don't approve of the job he is doing. he is doing everything he can to drop his job approval. he is going up the health care system, doubling utility rates, going to raise taxes on the middle-class as a result of this health insurance program, but he is going to do that after the programs are passed and he literally needs to make it through this summer, get health care passed, get cap and trade passed, get illegal immigration pass and then in september and

october led his ratings go to hell because he's got all of this through. and i believe that barack obama maybe the last since your idealists in american politics. i think you'd rather pass his agenda they get reelected. you'd rather keep -- his first priority is to make us into france and germany and sweden, that is his plan and we can't let it happen. [applause] so the crucial time is right now. now, i know that all of us felt really disempowered in this last election because we all live in states that are hopelessly blue and there was not much chance of being able to turn them around, but now that oversteered vantage because everybody you know is a democrat. so you all know people who voted for obama, you all know people like that. so go and talk to them, read the

book, it is why we roads, learn the facts and statistics senate, arguing it, push it, and get people to switch on the self position, and a boy, that is pulled every single day. and as a deaf ear: question suggests, not the unfair one of which is the one everybody covered but the one that really explains what is going on with the politicians follow, this is really ride on the fence right now. clearly they cannot get 60 votes in the senate but they will probably try to pass it with 51 but they may not get 51, and being able to average people like gillibrand and senator from new york who is running for reelection and is an appointed senator, being able to get people like that to focus on this stuff is really very important. the last thing i forgot to talk about and want to mention is that the state of israel is an absolute dire desperate straits at the moment because of the

obama policy. is doing nothing about iranian nuclear weapons, but god forbid they build an extra room on to the house with their newborn baby in a settlement on the west bank and all hell breaks loose in the united states is really positioning itself against israel. in fact, in this book we revealed that they have come up with a 100 -- $100 billion aid package that goes to the united nations refugee relief agency in the gaza strip and the west bank which is a pass-through to, loss and absolute pass through and explain how it is and indicate what is going on here. it is absolutely important that those of us who are concerned about the state of israel to get a hold of mr. chuck schumer says that he is a fan of the state of israel and really tell him that this is the time to put up or shut up because he could turn obama around on this issue if you wanted to. and pressuring him and letting

him know how you feel is terribly important. so this book is not only to educate you, it is to give the hallmark assignments and, please, work like hell. thank you. [applause] >> i'm a little conflicted because you have waited so long for a book signing so let me take three or four questions and not heavyweight. >> we have a microphone, wait for it to get to you before you ask your question. >> hi, my brother in law is dr. david weldon, a conservative congressman from florida. you probably know him a and i

asked him and to ask a question will let the republicans win in the house and senate in 2010? piven if the republicans are going to very well win the event that election of 2010. [applause] whether they will actually be able to win control or not is something we just don't know at this point that they will clearly have a very large net gain of seats. you need 38 switches in the house to get control and that is tough, but i can see 10 or 15 that i think they would win right now and i think each passing month is looking better and better for them the senate is a tougher story because the seeds that are up are largely republican seats. there is a disproportionate number of republicans who are up this year. because this is the election of 2010 and they will last collected in 2004 that was a pretty good republican year so

the disproportionate number of the seats are republican and a lot of the seats that are up for a solid democratic states. but that is not necessarily a reason to give up hope number one and number to you got to understand how congress works. the issue is not mathematics, the issue is fear. if you knock off four or five incumbent democratic senators and flipped two or three open seats, even though they would have 53 votes they are not going to use it because they're scared to death and in the house of representatives if the democrats took a 10 seat margin in the house bill would pass everything but it is a 38 seat margin the collapse 10 seats and they're scared to death and looking 28 as pushing up tombstones and they begin to consider flubbing their votes. and it becomes a vicious cycle for them because the close of the votes against the close of the democratic control gas among the leadership can't let them off the hook and still pass the

bill which means they can't to the hypocrisy they just did when they were all for capt. training but pretend they are against it by voting against it once pelosi is assured them it will pass anyway. and they become unable to do that so the spirits of your question is, yes, we will win the 10 election, whether we will take control or not depends on how hard we work and how much we do. >> first of all, i want to say it is an honor speaking in front of you. i'm probably one of their youngest supporters but i agree with you so much [applause] i go to a liberal university and to hear you speak sometimes is like -- you know. my question to you is a listen to a lot of fox news and when it ron paul is on, he speaks about how he is anti federal reserve and i know now that he has legislation pending in the house

about ordering the federal reserve and i believe senators also have a counterpart of the bill and the senate. have you the feeling about ordering the preserve it and some time getting rid of the reserve altogether? kim and i don't thank you can get rid of the federal reserve, it's too important to function and was adopted in 1914 because never panics every 10 years and there was no way to manage them and bear in mind that we have not had, we have had one horrible depression since 1930's and that was in the early '80s and that was man-made because of inflation. this is the first one that was not a man made it so they have run the whole done a good job but bernanke has gone completely nuts. i mean, he has become absolutely power corrupts absolutely. the forcing that marriage. they don't have a shotgun marriages anymore unless you are a bank. [laughter] that merrill lynch, that was

incredible when he did to the bank of america and i think that there is a serious concern now about the fed overreaching but the thing i am more concerned about then that are two things. first the inflation that we talked about or the fed is gone crazy in terms of printing money. such so that might not even just the inflation, might not be 18 percent inflation or something, it might be a whole loss of faith in the currency, it might be rivers and to the barter system. and i'm literally destroy the global economy because all the nations of the world are doing it once, not like there are two keep the crisis and is a way from the peso. everybody is doing it at once and that could be very serious. the second thing that i'm really concerned about is a chapter in our book that is a declaration of independence has been repealed. obama went to the g28 summit which is now g-7 plus 13 other

countries helping determine our global economy responds all countries like argentina. [laughter] in those countries have created a global system of financial regulation. your new boss is called the financial stability board. it is headed by a central banker from italy and controlled by the european central bankers and they will formulate according to the g20 communicate which we signed on to become global policies about regulation of derivatives, financial instruments and investment practices and executive pay in quotes all industries. i did not say all financial, i said all, and what you're going to look at here is the united states will sit at the table, come to join resolutions on these issues and then tell the sec and the federal reserve board you have to implement those. it is a bargain we struck in you

have to stand by and. which means that these enormous powers will no longer go to people who are appointed by elected president and confirmed by elected senate but go to people who aren't even americans and it becomes a very dangerous thing. and threatens two really integrate this into the european union. the biggest threat to democracy in the world today is not socialism even with obama, he's not gone to mess with our fundamental right to vote, and it is not the terrace, they will blow us up and not take us over. is the bureaucrats, the bureaucratization of the world in which itself selected elite that fancies itself acting independent of the public will for the public good usurps this power and you see that in the european union. in the european parliament they are not even allowed to introduce legislation, all they can do is vote yes or no on bills that are submitted by the bureaucracy and that international bureaucracy

overcoming the nation state democracy system is a key threat to our freedom and we went too far down the road in the g27 doing that. >> did in president obama said he wasn't going to raise taxes those who earn under two and 50,000? if he lets the bush tax cuts die one everybody get a raise in taxes? >> he is saying that he will not let the bush tax cuts die that affect people in middle and lower incomes. in other words, he is only going to do the top bracket in the second bracket, the 39.6 in the 35 brackets and he is going to drop those an increase those -- 35 and 33 will raise to 40 and 35. but it is very clear number one that for his health insurance program he is going to raise taxes on middle-class, he is

going to make the health insurance money that your employer now spends on your behalf taxable on your return which means you're going to add up all the money you got on your w-2 and then you're going to have to add eight or $10,000 that she never got that your employer paid on your behalf for health insurance and that's going to be taxable income to you that you're going to have to pay and one of the things that drove me completely insane in the last week is he is proposing to imply that to everybody except union members. if your health insurance is the result of a collective bargaining agreement it will not be a taxable event. the supreme court will throw that out because it violates equal protection clause but not before we have to go through two or three years of paying that tax. and in addition to that, the threshold has somehow dropped from 250,000 basically to about 100. if you have a household income of more than 100, more than 90

puts in the top 20% and you are going to see a tax increase and it doesn't include the utility interests. you're bill will double over the next four years as a result of the capt. trade regulation or that horrible little,. it will be like -- listen, i'm sorry, i love to take all your questions because i love doing that but i will be signing books and you can ask me as you go whizzing by and if i don't do it i'm going to delay you. thank you. [applause]

president obama will be in moscow starting monday for a three day summit with medvedev. next a panel discussion of looking at some of the issues that might be discussed during that meeting. the heritage foundation hosted this two and half hour event. >> in morning, thank you for johnny us here at the found -- heritage foundation. in it is my privilege to welcome

you to our douglas and sarah allyson auditorium, to welcome those who are joining us on the internet and our heritage.org website, those who are joining us via c-span live in several who are joining us internationally. we do ask everyone in house to make that less chris you check that cellphones and other electronic devices have been turned off, there are enough electronics and also in the room without more. we will post the program within 24 hours on our heritage website for your future reference and, of course, questions can be submitted through out the program simply addressing them via e-mail through a speaker at heritage.org. following are introductory remarks we will feature two panels, the panels will be hosted by dr. kalin and peter brooks. and dr. cohen is a senior research fellow for russian and eurasian studies and international energy security,

peter is in the asian studies center, their introductions will occur later in the program. opening our program is hallandale who serves as director of the douglass and sarah allyson center for foreign policy studies and she is also deputy director of the katherine ann shebly: davis institute. she is a media fellow at the hoover stanford university, serves on the board of visitors on the level of journalism and a georgetown, the center for free inquiry and hanover college in indiana and business for diplomatic action. she is also a member of the council on foreign relations. please join me in welcoming hallandale. [applause] >> thank you, john, and thank you to all of you for being here today. we are going to have a very interesting program. we tried this video link-up with

moscow just once before, this scenario, and i think we are improving on a technique so i think this morning we should have a fairly smooth run by the looks of it. we have from moscow the head of the heritage moscow office and also joined by other commentators over there. as you all know, we are looking at ads in a event in the early years of the obama administration, the summit in moscow on july 6 through 8 with president medvedev. the relationship is in the united states and russia is one of the most important finding in foreign policy. we hear and heritage are deeply interested in some concern at times and bad away by the new administration looks like it was to say that relationship. we have a lot of questions and we are hoping that are two

panelist today will have some of the answers. we have a really outstanding line up both from washington and moscow. the topics on the discussion in the presidential summits will be arms control, possibly a new strategic arms reduction treaty, there will be discussions of the russian demand for new global economic and security architecture, specifically, of course, moscow wants to halt nato enlargement and prevent ukraine and georgia from joining in that institution back here and i'm sure they're also be reflections on russia's standing in the global financial crisis which has hit harder over there and from the americans signed the administration has hinted that you like to see a grand

bargain to establish a new footing in the russia u.s. relationship. the secretary of state clinton and memorably talked about the recent burdened with and they can succeed in pushing that is a question. there is a famous piece of equipment by now. and from the americans sign of loosening the obama administration might be willing to trade some of the missile defense plans in central europe for russian cooperation on iran's nuclear program, whether that as a bargaining possible strike or whether you can verify such a bargain is being observed is very much an open question. so what does mr. obama want? what is the understand about the russians? some money that may not be very much unfortunately.

and some people over there they can never regard president obama as a kind of gorbachev, somebody they can do business with, and, of course, gorbachev is not very well liked in russia because he put an end to the soviet empire. so that could be a bit of a backhanded compliment, russian civil society and what they expect president obama, arms control and economics, the gamut of all the issues that will be addressing in the next week. join us for our panel of experts, our first speaker, our first moderator rather obey serial: who is senior research fellow and the heritage foundation in russian and

eurasian studies, an expert on u.s.-russian relations hearing he has been extensively on both in terms of his own books and have his published pieces in newspapers and journals over the world so i know that you're familiar with his name as a hub for television audiences as wow. over to you. >> thank you very much. thank you for coming and thanks to our viewers on c-span and online aunt www.heritage.org. the u.s.-russian relations and as she just mentioned is one of the pillow relationships of the united states. the question today is whether we are facing a new beginning or

things will continue very much as business as usual. the advantage of being in a think tank in not in the government is in the derrin today a lot of our colleagues are scrambling riding last minute and most. we can take and 30,000 feet to view and for that i try to bring people both from russia and from washington from the united states and people from different perspectives and hopefully the first panel will reflect that balance. arms control is that the heart of historic plea the u.s.-soviet relationship in now u.s.-russia relationship, and for the second part of the panel and our own leading expert probably the world's leading expert on arms control and weapons of mass destruction is going to speak but we will start with someone who really has a lifetime of

experience. and a bird's eye view of this relationship as well as other strategic relationships room as his career reflects. fritz was a director of national security programs at the nixon center, he was senior director of in ronald reagan's national security council and the chairman of the national intelligence council. he will provide a sort of it the american panoramic perspective on the relationship and a brick the sun is taking mass. he will be followed in mind that the director of the journalism club, he directed from moscow stayed in '86 and received a ph.d. in 1990. she worked as a reporter for news agency interfax, editor

from moscow newsweekly, financial columnist for the financial times, finalists for moscow radio, she was the head of public affairs department for a central bank of russia so she has a broad perspective as a journalist but importantly as the board member for the charitable and education programs at the into regional non-governmental organization open russia. then as i said it we will move to arms control issues the with baker spring, research fellow national security policy, baker he contributed to defeating the anti-ballistic missile treaty early in the decade and provided extensive studies of