so it can pay salaries. that is the news of the day and i think you jumped right into it. with exactly 7:00 and i would definitely save some time for questions so whenever i don't cover. and of course, you know, our distinguish panelist, senator mchale. [laughter] and our ambassadors and also march and from brookings. senator, you're an early proponent of the no-fly zone. how was i going? >> not too well. i think it is pretty clear if we had to clear the no-fly zone when the rebels were clearly had momentum on their side, that it would most likely the conflict

would have been over two -- . .

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon and welcome. the house select committee on intelligence, subcommittee on terrorism, human intelligence analysis and counterintelligence will come to order. the first order of business is to welcome my ranking member, mike thompson and the other members of the subcommittee and those from the full committee who have joined us today. mike thompson is a good friend, and like the chairman and ranking member of the full committee, mike and i are committed to working in a bipartisan fashion on the subcommittee whenever possible. we met recently to discuss the way ahead for the subcommittee and as a result, we have a

robust bipartisan plan for oversight in the areas of the subcommittee broad jurisdiction. today we are having an open hearing on the muslim brotherhood. open hearings are rare for the house intelligence committee and the subcommittee's actually, the chairman rogers and i feel that this important issue should be discussed with the american people. as governments are shaken in the arab spring, intelligence agencies across the world are studying what kind of governments would follow in a new geopolitical landscape across the middle east. central to this discussion is the muslim brotherhood. founded in egypt in 1928, the muslim brotherhood was dedicated to implementing traditional islamic sharia law in opposition to british imperial rule. an interesting debate has arisen regarding the role of the muslim brotherhood and what they might play in future governments. some assert that the muslim brotherhood has not renounced

violence as a political means and any inclusion of the brotherhood would fundamentally undermine democratic movements and governments. due to confusion about the niche are and the degree of the threat from the muslim brotherhood, this topic deserves further exploration. the purpose of this hearing is to discuss the activities of the muslim brotherhood hope in the middle east and in the united states in an effort to clarify what this group aims to do and how it or sues those aims. i seek to encourage discourse about the muslim brotherhood to help assist analysts across the world who are struggling to understand what comes next in the middle east. additionally, this hearing will address how our government is and should be dealing with the muslim brotherhood. much of the confusion surrounding the muslim brotherhood stands from its abandonment of violence. when the group declared that it would no longer use violence to achieve its goals, many in america and throughout the world ceased to view it as a threat of

any kind. the group's apparent embrace of democracy is further convince him that it is a harmless organization that shares the freedom bent freedom loving values of much of the western world. however that depth of the brotherhood's commitment to violence is unclear. it may renounce violence as a means to gain power in egypt but don't forget it is the parent organization of the palestinian hamas which pledges its commitment to violence against israel and its founding charter. in addition the muslim brotherhood's most influential theologian, use of owl kara dolly has sanctioned attacks on american forces in iraq, endorsed palestine suicide bombings and recently proclaimed to wish to kill the jewish before he you guys. ..

and on long island. we must also look at the extremist ideology they espouse and whether it leads to the radicalization and ultimately acts of terrorism. my own view is some of the changes in the muslim brotherhood are merely superficial. their abandonment of violence is arguably for tactical reasons and i suspect still opposed to the general pluralism and the protection of minority rights.

for example, non-muslims and women are not afforded the same rights as muslim men under the way of thinking. we need to examine closely with their it is setting up a worldwide islamic regime still in place. the reported leader of the muslim brotherhood in egypt from 1996 until 2002 wrote that jihad or not always limited to the specific region of the islamic country since the muslim homeland is one and is now divided this is also a very important nature because the muslim brotherhood appears to be active in the u.s. although not in the traditional sense. there are no card bearing members of the croupier. there's no buildings on the case street that safe muslim brotherhood and the lobby directory. instead the group spends residential to a large number of affiliated organizations throughout the country. this allows the muslim world read to muddy the waters when it comes to foreign funding and

influence and hide behind groups that have plausible deniability of their involvement with when necessary. we know this because of the department of justice produced clear evidence in the 2008 holy land foundation trial. the largest ever some financial trial in american history which shows the muslim brotherhood is in america and outlined to the operates here. our witnesses today will be able to shed some light on the evidence produced in this trial and explain how the muslim brotherhood operates behind the scenes. the federal government doesn't have a comprehensive or consistent strategy for dealing with the muslim brevard and its affiliated groups in america nor does it have a strategy for dealing with the brotherhood in egypt or the greater middle east. a lack of understanding about the group is led to a classic case of government disorientation. we heard the spectrum of the views on the approaches to the interaction with the brotherhood from various government

officials. this inconsistency makes me feel like our government is playing checkers while the muslim brotherhood is playing chess. so i'd like to hear from the witnesses their views on what the government policy should be with regard to the brotherhood. we will clarify by hearing some of the preeminent expert on the group including a local muslim leader, scholar who wrote a book entitled the new muslim brotherhood in the west, two experts on the least affairs who returned from checks to egypt just days ago and i think him for being here i know that's tiring. and a professor who specializes in political science and international fares. we have a very balanced panel of witnesses sitting before ross two of whom were invited by the ranking member so that we can have a full discussion that addresses all sides of the issue. one of the intelligence committees will ever given access to intelligence community personnel who provide us with classified information on

matters of national security and as such i intend to follow on this hearing in the near future with a closed classified hearing on the muslim brotherhood to allow subcommittee members to hear from the executive branch with the government knows about this group and what it's doing to address this threat. my hope is that this hearing will provide congress with a better understanding of the muslim brotherhood sweet and ask the government officials and from questions about their policies and strategies towards muslim brotherhood and i'd like to invite my friend the ranking member to make an opening statement. senator correct we are friends and a trade relationship working together on these issues and others and this is truly out of the ordinary to have an open hearing as the chair stated this committee and the entire time i've been on the intelligence committee this is the first

subcommittee open hearing that i've participated in and i think the first one that we've had so i appreciate the chair effort to gather information and gather an understanding of some of the most for any issues we face today is a thing to for that, madam share. and welcome to all of the witnesses and thank you for taking the time to inform the subcommittee about your research and experience with a muslim brotherhood to have individuals to influence the events and countries important to the u.s. countries such as egypt. the muslim brotherhood is involved to some degree in reshaping the egyptian government. for that reason this hearing could be productive it provides a fact based examination of the brotherhood activities objectives and potential to

affect u.s. foreign will policy. however, just as important there are limits to what this hearing can or should accomplished. first and foremost, this hearing must not become a witch hunt, about the vast majority of egyptians and citizens who protested peacefully at the square. nor is this about the millions of the law abiding muslim americans who contribute to our american society. intelligence oversight has absolutely nothing to do with the constitutional activities of americans who practice religion, attract others to the religion, participate in the political process or influence u.s. policy which by the way in washington and state legislatures and in city halls across the country we call lobbying this shouldn't prove guilt by association. every organization has bad apples so we shouldn't judge an

organization by only if you dismembers. my understanding is that since the muslim brotherhood has a large written record anyone can select statements to make the case for or against the organization. our experts can help us analyze the was statements and provide their assessment of the brotherhood's true intentions. third, today's hearing is not about terrorism. as a member of the intelligence committee, i certainly take very seriously our duty to protect our nation and counterterrorism. but let's be clear that the egyptian muslim brotherhood is not a state department designated for foreign terrorist organizations and according to the written testimony. fourth this hearing is not an investigation into criminal what devotee. no one here speaks for the u.s. law enforcement or is a law enforcement officer. we may need to follow-up as the

chair said with a closed hearing to find out if there are any muslim brotherhood related violations of u.s. law. today's open hearing is not that far. and finally i strongly believe that this hearing must not become yet another recruitment tool for extremists. experts in the field note that even in a free society individuals would be driven to violence if they feel victimized michael was nothing is said today that can be interpreted as targeting or victimizing anyone. i know that he also expressed the desire to have a serious discussion that doesn't offend any law-abiding citizen of our great country. i'm eager to work together to reach that goal by keeping this session with infirm parameters connected to the intelligence oversight and again i appreciate the working relationships and your willingness to try to find out the important information that we know and i yield back.

>> thank you. we will now turn to the witness' testimony. our first witness is the executive director of the washington institute for near east policy. as an expert on arab and islamic politics as well as u.s. middle east policy he's one of the foremost voice is on the mat on to the topics to the game in guest appearances on major news programs and regular contributions to major newspapers. moreover, he frequently travels to the middle east including a trip to egypt from which he returned earlier this week. thank you for being here and please, proceed with your five minute testimony. thank you madam chairman. it is a privilege to be allowed to present testimony to this subcommittee. i have a formal presentation for the record to make some brief comments at this time. as you just know divided return from a fact-finding mission to egypt several days ago which

included intensive discussions with a range of factors including members of the muslim brotherhood with your permission i will lead the discussion of muslim brotherhood inside the united states to my colleagues and focus on the situation in egypt first to procure a comment the muslim brotherhood madam chair doesn't occupy by itself the islamist space in egypt. the actual issue of islamist challenge to egyptian politics is even bigger than just the brotherhood itself. there are different movies to be a commitment from party some elements all along the spectrum in the egyptian politics today. the range on the most radical for the killers of sadat who were released from prison in recent weeks and form their own political party. they include extremist sell fees' who never before recent events pleaded political role but are now actively engaged in

politics. these are the people that have been burning the shrines and instead getting sicker and violence against the costs. as the muslim brotherhood and its own political party and there are some further liberal than the muslim brotherhood within the overall islamist free market. it's impossible at this early point to know how much these divisions matter and whether indeed the brotherhood is trying to create the appearance of political division to make themselves look more moderate and to some egyptians the depue of the brotherhood is that they are not as extreme as to say the killers of sinnott and when they would be reaping some of the - benefits of this perception when egyptian elections are held later this year. madam chairman i believe the concern of the brotherhood potential emergence as a major player and even power broker in egypt is warranted. as i noted in a previous congressional testimony, the brotherhood is not as some people suggest it is it is not

in the egyptian version of the marchant times. it isn't merely a social or humanitarian organization committed to improving the welfare of the egyptian people. it's a profound political organization that seeks to reorder egyptian and brought muslim society and a certain political direction. tactically believe the organization looks like a battle opportunities it is offered. has renounced its most ambitious goals and the violent means to achieve them in my view only as a result of the regime compulsion. not a free choice by the leaders of the organization themselves. should the brotherhood achieve political power it will almost certainly use the power to transform egypt into a very different place. the best case he analogy would be turkey under its current leadership with a secular state gradually being islamist. a more realistic situation would seek deeper and more systematic

islamist society including the potential for a frightening growth secretarianism between muslims and copps. and even deepening the enter muslim conflict between the saudis and the more peaceful brand of islam. it would be a mistake in my view for the united states to operate under the assumption that the brotherhood's the ascension to power is inevitable and such an assumption is dangerous and could lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. if we look at the election results in 2005 and the recent referendum in egypt a majority of egyptian voters do not support the muslim brotherhood and there's reason to believe if given the right amount of support, organizational backing and time, the non-islamist more liberal forces of egypt may triumph for the muslim brotherhood. still, it is important for washington to be vigilant about the brotherhood based on the

words of islamist leaders and the experience of islamists in and another government and other countries and the implications of the brother of electoral success will be felt in numerous ways. from the social mores to the education policies and the regional policy would have particular impact on the peace with israel. in the recent weeks brotherhood leaders have been downplaying the previous statements calling for either abrogation of the treaty or a national referendum to determine whether egypt should continue to adhere to the treaty. now they say little more and this is an issue that the new space parliament should address. most likely that is because of the e egyptian military position on this issue. in today's each of the this moment before the elections. however, in an islamist egypt,

the future frigidity of egypt and israeli peace is likely to make the experience of the last couple of decades look positively warm and cozy this would have the practical effect of the policy towards, dhaka and egypt policing of sinai and sale of natural gas to israel, the continued operation of the qualified industrial zones between egypt and israel, and of course in all of these ways and more a more islamist egypt would have serious ramifications for a bilateral relationship. it's important for the united states to study lei balance between the one hand being alleged dangers of the brothers and its allies pose to the critical interest on the one hand and between avoiding giving the brotherhood a political gift in the form of certain lightning rod statements or actions that could motivate voters who are otherwise opposed to the brother had message to come out and

support the movement. privately we should be working with the supreme military council so that technical decisions are made and training and electoral process that doesn't inadvertently assist the brother of its political prospects. moreover, we should share with them information on the foreign funding especially the gulf funding of islamist groups, parties and movements with an audit insulating egypts space experiment from the various interests from outside parties that might be committed to a greater is solmization of egyptian society were generally i believe it is most important to be clear to the egyptians about the type of egypt with him we can have a firm partnership. an open tolerant respectful democratic egypt, and egypt in which copps and muslims play an equal role in the shaping of the society. that's the egypt we can work

within the egyptian voters should know that that is the tide of egypt that we want to be able to see at the end of their electoral process. thank you adam chair. he's an academic and security experts and currently a visiting fellow with the rand corporation who specializes in a solmization and political violence in europe and north america. he's the author of two books, the latest of which as i mentioned is called the muslim brotherhood in the west. i might also add he was supposed to be in europe today but changed his plans soon to be here and we appreciate every much. thank you for doing that and think your testimony and please go ahead with your testimony. >> thank you. and members of the subcommittee thank you for inviting me today. as we serve the development of the next month in egypt i think it is important to also take a broad perspective as you mention in your opening statement and

analyze the global reach of the muslim brotherhood and putting here in america i would like to advise my testimony in three parts. first, i want to examine how the brotherhood operates here in the west. second, i want to discuss the goals and third, i want to provide it was a recommendation during power. today groups in more than 80 countries place their origins to the brotherhood and the adopted the various forms and tactics according to the environment which they operate to. this includes the west were most of the groupings created in the 1960's and 70's the brotherhood activists have evolved into some of the most visible muslim organizations in europe and north america. let me be clear it's incorrect to use the term muslim brotherhood in america if with this expression we need the organization in the united states are controlled by the brotherhood in cairo of a monolithic hierarchical entity. yet it's fair to say that in the

united states and in most western countries that our organizations that also independently operated have historical financial, personal organizational and ideological ties to the muslim brotherhood. today things to the combination of ideological flexibility and unrelenting activism, large funding and the organization of competing islamist movements for their organizations have gained significant influence. even if the membership remains small they've shown an enormous ability to monopolize the discourse and its position themselves at the forefront of the competition to be the main interlocutors of the western governments and the media. to my second point the goal of the organization from the brotherhood and the middle east also the procedure the introduction of the sure villa in the west the western brothers of deeply pragmatic, and aware of what they can and cannot do. therefore they are elsewhere.

foremost among them is serving as lummis identity of the muslims. a second goal is to be designated as the representatives of the muslim community. the brothers understand the relationship of the western elites could provide them with a financial and political capital that would allow them to significantly expand their influence inside the muslim community summit and the clever political calculation, they seek to be recognized by the western elites as representatives of the muslim community. so as to eventually obtain the same recommendation within the community itself. analysts are deeply divided and there is assumed the organization. they're simply a socially conservative force that accept democracy to cooperate with them on various issues including terrorism and radicalization. d.c. a much more sinister agenda. and they argue that in the resources of most westerners the

western brothers art in modern bass worse engaged in a sort of still subversion and weakening the society from within. intelligence agencies in europe tended to share the pessimistic view within the united states has elsewhere this know, this is not within the government. this dynamic is exemplified by the fbi relationship with terror here in the united states. the most visible and controversial among the u.s. based organization that traces the origins to brotherhood. some top fbi officials have publicly stated the goal is to, quote, further the agenda for radical islamist terrorist groups by providing political support in the court. others have publicly thanked them for a, come commitment to maintaining a dialogue leading to the frank and honest exchange of ideas and difficult. this contradiction hardly limited to the fbi is the result of the combination of factors. but it's a. there's an understanding of the

fbi that will care and some of its affiliates might not be the ideal partners the peerless seeking in region of the muslim community. they are a necessary one. the relationship wouldn't be more complex. the hearings chaired by the congressman king highlighted the story of the community leader was also ostracized by care for reaching out to the fbi to stop improvement but at the same time it's operated for the fbi and some terrorism cases by northern virginia residents who travel in 2009. about health policymakers deal with western brothers many pessimists for policies that would expose the brothers from engagement. one of this decision highlights traveling aspects of the brothers agenda but need to be addressed such a position as a realistic and counterproductive. although the representative this are overblown both organizations

to represent a cross-section of the community, talking only to the muslim leaders whose position is square with the government and pretending more confrontational voices do not exist isn't a constructive policy, and the brotherhood organization act of some of the law is one they provide financial support the group designated as has happened in the past the should be prosecuted. but since most of devotees are within the law they should be engaged. equally problematic is the approach with the brothers as a reliable partner. amol evidence shows that the aim of the brothers to the respond publicly. taking official action that would unnecessarily in power a handful of appointed leaders whose aims are at best seem naive. there is i would argue its third more nuanced way. first, government should reach out a broad range of muslim organizations because the disability shouldn't be mace become a stake in diprete second

engagement needs to be made on a firm understanding of the history, modus operandi and most important games of the brothers. finally, it is paramount to understand the difference between engagement and empowerment. establishing a permanent dialogue and even occasional limited funds of partnerships with most western brotherhood organization can produce some positive outcomes particularly in the security field but interesting them with powers is a counterproductive policy. crafted a coherent policy is not easy in particular because u.s.-based pratt of the organization's have been evolving in different ways and shouldn't be seen as a monolithic organization. but not on ideological pragmatic approach is needed to confront the largely unknown and figures extremely important reality. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you. >> over next witness is dr. mann's for coming in the egyptian born islamic scholar and critic whose granted political asylum in the united

states in 2002. because author 24 books and approximately 500 articles in arabic on the topics including what the sum and saudi arabia reform of the egyptian education and women's rights in the muslim world dr. mann's or is also the president of the international chronic center. fever being here to share in your point of view and i to please, proceed with your statement. let's begin. islam is a region of peace and tolerance and justice and [inaudible] would muslims when the established the entire relate all its values and they are doing the invented social sharia

contradict islam. after that, the west, mize and defeated muslims and to find a way they have to choose one of two ways. one way is to restore the past, so they want to restore the power for the set up empire, and this is what they've established in 1745. the other choice left by egypt

by the government known as mohammed fer egypt and muslims according to the western civilization, so there are two different ways modernization and it's destroyed that and 8018. the state's need egypt to survive, so the second would reestablish collapse it when the current state established until

he gets his name in 1932. it's a stubbles to egypt in three organizations to teach wahhabi is some under the name because he just hated and becomes it becomes wahhabi and [inaudible] and appointed him as the head of muslim brotherhood in 1928. that means the organization created needs egypt to survive and this gives us -- it is the

difference between muslim brothers, it is an organization that has its political agenda and they are considered a make up for the middle east and the people who concentrate about the mess and looking after to take over peacefully. ..

the muslim brother -- when bart came he posted so much and he executed us to some original piece and again we are -- when mubarak stepped down, used to tune used for church. not that there appear becomes

not opposed to themselves and filling the space that the future feature to have many meters, more than not you know, when the egyptian majority will be a big problem. looking at what happened to sell

it be will be uphill after all they have gone not only the middle east the american interest. going to america here, to know the difference between muslims. they have their own political agenda. and they will establish -- he belonged to the series that dividing the war into two camps. he is working for the same

agenda, which gallant to dividing the work into two camps. the camp of the muslim and they can't of recognition. so i am talking about their own innermost agenda. and they believe that the sino will become before it you today to see angels and they will attack the other camps so the need some people in the enemy camp to make the muslim community here in the u.s., so they control most of the so-called schools to brainwash

people, the muslim community here just like them. this is a big problem. i'm not talking about -- i have evidence now. i look at. this is the official translation made by the soldiers. official of the koran. not only in the main entrance tatian, but all of the in the foothills, 4 million copies of this transition in the united states, i give you when something -- >> if you can make it very quick guess we have to go vote

unfortunately. >> you know, as a muslim we say five prayers every day. and we have to guide us and jesus prays a christian and the rules that means anyone who believes in this translation and three times a day they are bringing brainwashed to look at his fellow american has the enemy abroad and according to the sharia has to kill him. what about what should be done?

and how do i suggest the american agent be in all of the ideas to make america and defend america to win muslim majority to defeat al qaeda. the >> for everybody to wreck together. >> thank you. >> thank you. when porsche have to go vote, so i hope you can be patient because they want to hear testimony and ask questions. we have for both come at one now which is almost over.

[inaudible conversations] >> okay, we are ready. we'll move onto.are brown and then if you have any else, dr. trained to look to that later. i want to be sure we get everyone in because we won't have us again, but we've got enough time that we should be fine for the rest of this hearing hopefully. let's move on to dr. brown,.professional at george washington university and the author of numerous books on your politics. he teaches courses on middle eastern politics as well as more general courses on comparison politics and international relationships. dr. brown, we appreciate your being here today. please go ahead. >> thank you very much madam chairman and members of the set

many. thank you for inviting me to testify today on the muslim brotherhood. as an academic, i'm in part gratified to have the subject of my scholarly work deemed a critical national importance. i've been conducting research in the muslim brotherhood movement in various countries in the arab world for the past seven years and i'm happy to share my impressions with the committee. but if much of the night damage may go to admit it, the topic of my research is a bit less critical than meets the eye. most brotherhood movements i think are far more political and diplomatic challenge than the security threat for the united states. more specifically, let me make three points today. first the brotherhood is not a violent organization apples place it operates. the brotherhood is telling the truth when it describes itself as peaceful movement. but it is truthful as well an exception in his mix at. in most countries the movement commission is very clear. a fix on the peaceful political change and reject science as a

way of securing both in the rejection of violence is not a mere adjustment but deep strategic adjustment. however, the movement also regard violence as legitimate in cases of foreign occupation and brotherhood movements have therefore verbally executed violence against american targets in iran. in the israeli case from the various brotherhood have shared in what i have to describe as the deplorable, even reprehensible failure to distinguish between military and civilian targets. ancient specifically the content of the muslim brotherhood movement on the egyptian israeli peace treaty has evolved but the brotherhood still is clearly verbally supportive of hamas. in the iraq case to mothers a strange ending the position of brotherhood movements against united dates because the iraqi political party list associated with the muslim brotherhood, iraq islamic party actually participated in sponsored efforts of reconstruction after two dozen priests of the brotherhood is certainly a

monolithic organization. perhaps the best evidence of the strategic rejection of violence and domestic politics with the brotherhood's activity over the past generation in a chip. in mubarak's family history pression became so intense the brotherhood began to withdraw partially from the political scene in the league in the movement in little unprepared for the revolution when it occurred at the movement never embraced violence do not leave me to my second point. we shouldn't overestimate the current brotherhood and let me let me restrict movements to egypt, which is the critical case in the 19 of the past of the various brotherhood movements. some see the brotherhood in egypt both internationally and domestically people harbor dark suspicions. this unification movement posted the links. taking advantage of any opportunity fortune secret alliances, tricking people missing payment to seize power and voting family begins. her reasons for concern about the brotherhood rice, but there's a reason for panic.

one often hears that the brotherhood is poised to do well in elections because it is the best organized political force in the country. there is some truth to the statement, but we have to remember elections for the brotherhood performed best, parliamentary elections in 2005 for once in which the vast majority of egyptians simply stayed home. when the brotherhood pulled out all of his supporters to vote in election where most people didn't vote, it did not even try to win the majority work at a have done so. in a more democratic system, where people are more politically engaged, there's every reason to brotherhood candidates to win seats, but most seasoned observers of each of considerate brother jordi unlikely, even if the movie thought in the movements to try different ones for yesterday that they will contest about a third. the brotherhood has been challenged by the current political atmosphere as much as any other political actor in the country. you have to figure when inscrutable military rulers have in mind.

it has to maintain unity within its own ranks in a very new and challenging environment and has to find a short political footing that shifts daily. how should we react? icemaker point. we have no real policy towards the brotherhood. we wreck if only to brotherhood movement depending where they operate them with their local characteristics are. our policy toward islamist in kuwait is different from that in jordan, which is in turn different from palestinian case. let me stick out when i seem to be in opposition here. i do not think we need a policy towards the brotherhood. the u.s. does need a policy towards where the brotherhood operates but we do not need a policy towards december 3rd any more than towards green parties, feminist movements. our differences with the brotherhood are often a product of different his own perceptions, prevent some priorities and they are best treated the level of relations between states and societies, not at the level of picking

winners and losers in other countries domestic political scene. the policy question that's often post in washington in this regard is whether the u.s. should engage the muslim brotherhood. i've always been puzzled by formulating a question that way. discussions between diplomats on the one hand and leaders of various organizations on the other by means of gathering information enemies of the period the policy question is therefore not whether or not engage the brotherhood. of course our diplomats to develop informative contacts with all political actors but that their job. such contacts are made to make sure the policy is better informed. in egypt and in several other states including jordan and morocco at an plea is not to the united states to decide who is included or excluded in which democratic structures might emerge. elections in the countries arranged in accordance with the law in place in the united states is unable to determine

rules of entering into electoral politics. no political in the country pricing for disqualification of brotherhood is the political actor. the real impeachment question is whether various domestic local forces can teach each other in a peaceful and stable way that makes these countries reliable partners of the foreign security affairs. the best they could contribute to investigation has been making clear we are going to work with any legitimate leadership as we expect other countries to work with our leaders and the policies emerged from her in the constitutional process he and institutions. have often been asked in several different arab countries, what is the american position on the brotherhood cleric cyrus had trouble answering the question because i'm not authorized to speak for the u.s. of america and i'm not sure i could even if i were authorized because the u.s. is a fairly diverse place. the answer is personal, not on behalf of my country, but in many ways with the american

policy challenges, rest of the brotherhood will represent a headache for us. it does not represent cancer. we can live with that. thank you. >> thank you. by next week is just the assistant professor of public policy at harvard university, a political scientist and middle east specialist. as the church focuses on develop and in countries that aren't free. he made the trip from boston to be here for which we are grateful. thank you very much and please go ahead. >> thank you very much, chairman myrick, ranking member thompson come and establishment of the committee. thank you for inviting me to testify today. as the chairman mention i'm public professor at harvard and have been studying the brotherhood for several years. ever my doctoral dissertation about the movement and consulted on the topic and currently

finishing a book about the subject. i've interviewed many muslim brotherhood leaders and members in the middle east and outside the middle east and said the movements history and read widely in writing davis keith entries and ideologues. i want to use my five minutes to speak about the muslim brotherhood and post ibaraki chip. but before beginning, i do want to say chairman myrick i've watched two of your videos on the moose on brotherhood and i have two reactions to that. the first is i think you are concerned with the muslim brotherhood will implement sharia law or further the cause here in the united states gives far too much credit to the brotherhood and not enough to our american culture and institutions, which i think is prudent durability in the face of all kinds of great challenges if communism was backed by a world superpower could make no dent in our armor, i hardly think the muslim brotherhood, which is an organization of popularity in the muslim world which is no great power behind

it can. as a scholar, but also somebody who's lived in the middle east and the west, i know well what the islamists and what they have to offer and i think i can play it nothing on us. most muslim americans know this, too. that's why they voted with their feet and came here. i must tell you, chairman myrick am extremely gratified by the distinction you make in your videos between the muslim brotherhood, which is a political movement and muslims who are followers of the world's second-largest anchor hammock faith. i'm thinking of the narrator in your video to distinguish between islamism, political ideology and the religion of which i am an imperfect but sincere follower. this is extremely welcome to me and many of my fellow american muslims who worry about being tired as columns in this country. this is important because there are people who want you to believe there is no distinction

between islamism and islam. they are called islamists. i am very grateful to you for not doing their work for them and they only encourage you to continue making distinctions as loudly as possible to those who might wish to paint all american muslims have secret islamists will know they have no support on the chairman of the subcommittee of the house unintelligence. i am happy to talk about any points in response to questions, but for the remainder of the time you want to focus on the brothers in egypt and the role in the coming period. silicone is scholarly research to answer five brief questions to you in my fellow americans may have about this movement. what the muslim brothers? what do they want? by the violence, committed to the nsa about to egypt? i may summarize this in the interest of time. what the muslim brothers? the religious and political movement that operates on a poor independent country.

others have mentioned their history and the chairman interstate into that as well. and i'll skip the early history history and just tell you that in the current. for the last basically 35 years, with it the nod to participate in the egyptian political life is basically a cross between a religious fraternity and political party. the few candidates in every parliamentary election since 1984 except one in 2005 they want 20% if the legislature. they're probably going to be illegal as soon. been outlawed in 1954 and in addition to running the elections they provide social services the extent to which the phenomenon exaggerated. what do they want quiet for another they want a more virtuous society and the legislation to make it happen. they believe government's role is to uphold the state and combat knives. so they got in the parliament, lift a ban and they've tried to in the past to be in novels and

provocative programs but they don't restrict themselves to the moral thumb like most egyptians they want economic development or infrastructure, but they believe the way to get these things is through implementation of the teachings of islam. this is why their slogan is islam islam is the solution. whatever the problem is come islam is the solution. they been criticized by egyptians for not articulating how islam can offer solutions to such problems as illiterate he come into brutality or water scarce be. internationally it is important to note one of the movement goals is achieving this community. this is something they paid a lot of lip service to. if you talk to some, they may tell you they would love to reestablish, but if you read what they read about the caliphate, they have in mind a kind of european union style federation that muslim states who joined voluntarily. it's not a kind of grand conquests enterprise.

their critics of the west generally an united states in particular, both for our hegemony in the world, but also for our cultural values, which i think they find it odd as traditional ones. the muslim brothers are as likely to criticize america for things like our acceptance of homosexuality or sex outside of marriage for invasion into iraq and israel. are they a violent and committed to democracy? you've mentioned this before. it is to muslim brotherhood to send a violent history in the 1940s. they had a secret apparatus that in 1948 assassinated egyptian prime minister but today's news and brothers will play the violence is in their path and they are committed today in the words of actually their former leader to seeking a peaceful alternation of power through the ballot box and framework of a constitutional parliamentary republic. others will come back and tell you all squashy's number two man

was once a member of the muslim brotherhood. there's clearly a materially fair. it's important to note that zawahiri is viewed as having sold out in the brothers for their part to distinguish themselves from al qaeda whom they view as to start it nihilists. if you look at the muslim brotherhood's english-language website, vivisection called muslim brotherhood versus al qaeda which has articles about distinction between these groups and criticism of planetary son. i would point you brought up stuff on the general brotherhood in early 2001 september 14, 2001, he signed in arabic statement condemning the attacks on the world trade center and the pentagon. father so some are on land because the statement is the founder of hamas. they've come through in record as being opposed to the great crime against our country.

i will echo what professor brown says that because they do not share what terrorism is bigger likely to view hamas and hezbollah as acts of violence or legitimate to ask those resistance. i would only say your fit their view is actually not a fringe view in egyptian or arab society. it's not even held solely by islamists and this is something we'll have to deal with in the middle east but i don't think it will prevent us from defending our friends are entries. i've written a whole book about muslim brotherhood and a only echo what my colleague said, which is if we look at their performance in 2005, they capture 20%, but the only god between 2.5 and 3 million egyptians to go and vote for them. out of 32 million eligible egyptian voters in upcoming

parliamentary elections in september we expect much higher turnout than we have no way of knowing if these people had previously stay home would vote for islamists are not. so what if any of this leave us? i think it leaves us where we began. the hearing as a religious group and political party in a poor country. it is a particularly friendly to american power or culture or come but neither is in a position to threat neither of those things. it has a vision for each of whom i consider retrograde, but claims to achieve the patient through the electoral process in so far behavior is earnest out. they've lost a lot of elections. whether the egyptian people will be reset to to the president's agenda is an open question, but with a lot of evidence egyptians have a wide range of political preference in affiliations and muslim brothers cannot claim to represent immaturity. we should be concerned with

teaching the strength or threats of us in brotherhood and would help to ensure that each of sledging democratic institutions are healthy, durable and in front of her to any group that would subvert them. thank you very much. >> thank you, dr. masoud. i've always been very clear in making that distinction when i talk about that. i spent a lot of my time working with under husbands who try to do the same thing in so i appreciate you mentioning that. i wanted to recognize the ranking member of the full committee, mr. roethlisberger for joining us. thank you. which like to say anything? [inaudible] >> well, we'll go to questions and i'll start bad game that has been discussed throughout the testimony. over the past several months,

we've seen mixed messages from the brotherhood and at one point they said they wanted to scrap the egypt and israel peace treaty when they earned major global headlines, they said they would oppose the treaty and they also say they publicly support hamas. they said they want democracy and rights yet a recent associated press article dated the solve is the muslim brotherhood were discussing the possibility of coordination in the upcoming elections. these are the same fallacies they rejected queries for women and minorities. in fact the same article says the fallacies in the chapter attacking christian and liquor stores, trying to impose their version of islamic law in provincial towns and a quote that. further, the brotherhood recently removed laws from the english-language website where it had explicitly stated it mission of establishing the islamic fatality. at same time, there goes

establishing under islamic law permits posted on the arabic website. are we seeing the brotherhood of the west what they want to hear what reached another message to the people in egyptian history. do you think our government is taking it forward rather than looking at actions? how does this impact or intelligence analysis? her committee needs to know that. >> thank you, madam chairman. as is one of most important questions about the muslim brotherhood. the brotherhood absolutely tries to be opportunistic and offer a different face to a different audiences. their sample evidence he needs identified a number of examples of this year the brotherhood has had his approach to politics for quite some time. when working with the mubarak

regime was in its interest in the regime is your moment reached understandings that the brotherhood to operate social welfare organizations and places the government could not close reach. the brotherhood took advantage of the opportunity to extend political reach into those areas. what was clear after the tahrir square protests began, these are the pro-settler youth who triggered it and put his finger to the wind and recognize this was an opportunity and it jumped right in and was an important player in bringing the protest to actual success. the brotherhood is extremely opportunistic, quite willing to engage in partnerships whether we fallacies fallacies or others to advance his political and social agendas. i think your point about the brotherhood's views on the peace treaty with israel is that they

said in the testimony and absolute case in point. the brotherhood has lowered the level of tension on this issue because it knows that the military has been quite clear in setting acceptable yardsticks for deception indeed, because it doesn't want to trigger alarm bells in places like washington. my own experience over time this i believe that certain parts of our intelligence community have had a fascination with the moves in brotherhood and like-minded groups, believing they represent quote authentic muslim political organizations in their countries and that non-islamist political movements, be they liberal or leftist or otherwise are not authentic, that they are somehow overly western in orientation and don't represent real arabs,

muslims and the egyptians at the case may be. .. this design year to find real arabs and muslims and to engage with. i think we should recognize what the political objectives are. we cannot have a policy which says no we won't deal with and egypt that has muslim brotherhood as part of the

political system, that's a mistake but we should be quite clear about who they are, what they want and what their objectives are to change egypt and other countries in this part of the world. >> thank you. >> doctor i wanted to ask you about all holy land foundation trial. in that trial the federal prosecutors introduced hard evidence that the head organized presence in america a plan and structure to accomplish their goals. it is spelled out in the 1991 document called the explanatory memorandum which was introduced which stated that the brotherhood a goal was, and i quote, a kind of grand jihadists and eliminating and destroying western civilization from within and sabotaging the hands of the the leaders so that it's eliminated and got a's religion is made victorious over all other religions, and of quote. the memo also listed 29 organizations working in the united states in the broader goals.

several of the organizations are still in existence today. why should we have any expectation that this all came to an end when many of the same players are still active politically. if logic dictates the brotherhood goals and plans in america wouldn't have just disappeared so what is the nature of the muslim brotherhood in america today? does our government fully understand who these people and groups are and based on this document which states they want to eliminate and destroy from within, what are some legitimate concerns we should have a presence and a plan in america? >> yeah, the document to mention doherty absolutely shocking and i think the memoranda that he mentioned, more some of the wiretaps of the fbi and evidence and the philadelphia meetings really show some dark features of the brotherhood in the u.s. and some of the groups that come from the sort of middle. one that you received the

group's operating still today, some of them as you said mentioned in that memorandum have just gotten better and presenting a more moderate facade to the government in general. the realities still for the same ideology but just getting better not talking a good game. the counter argument to that is the organizations to change. people change perspectives, the demographic change in some degree in the organizations meaning that a new generation of american foreign leaders have slowly taken the helm of this organization and there might be some change. we don't really know the answer to that. i think you might have different answers for different organizations. as i said in my testimony we shouldn't see this brother had u.s. monolithic. it makes sense to see some of the organizations mentioned as that line of thinking mentioned

in a memorandum. some mothers have evolved the understanding of talking about a civilization of chehab or acted upon the civilization doesn't make a lot of sense. it doesn't make them necessarily what we would consider we talk about moderate muslims as much as the term is not liked by most people in the muslim community. we might not consider them as such. they changed their views and their ways. how much does the government know, going to the second question about this development. as an outsider, an academic, i cannot claim to have full knowledge of what the u.s. government thinks and how they assess and engage in the organizations. my source educated guess having talked with a lot of people within the u.s. government is that no unified assessment, there is no unified engagement

policy. it's very much to the change region the vegetables in the same agency you have amazing cases of controversy within same offices of semen departments, so the nature of each organization are not to engage. so it is quite problematic. i think to some degree that has to do with the nature of the organization that being mostly political but operating under the veneer of the religious organizations an understandable reluctance of the u.s. government to investigate them or to look inside them because the separation of church and state is inappropriate for the agents of the government to look into the organizations unless they have hard evidence and legal one activities are taking place inside them. that creates a situation where i'm not sure that there is a widespread knowledge within the u.s. government about the nature of the organization and consequently how to do with it,

how to engage them. it seems to be sort of oversimplified and the kind of black and white assessment. they are committing a crime like they are funding hamas than we investigated them. if they are not committing a crime, they are good and we should engage with them. there's probably some gray area, something in between which we might not be carrying out the activities, nevertheless there might not be the partners the government is looking for, but with the exception, a lot of exceptions i think is lost in some quarters of the u.s. government. for the most part they have to stay out of a lot of the dynamics that it did with the muslim community and is not the u.s. government ought to get into this dynamic and between the brotherhood of the malaysian

and other muslim organizations in the u.s.. i think what the u.s. government can do is avoid coming and we go back to my point, engage the power giving legitimacy to these organizations, treating them as the representative of the muslim community when they are not -- by doing that he can if given the incentive to the organization's with other organizations. 64. i have another question that i will go to mr. thompson. >> thank you, madame chair. i'd like to begin with professor brown. professor, in your written testimony you state that there is a precious little evidence that the international organization of the muslim brotherhood seeks to establish a global islamic caliphate. you also state that suspicions of brotherhood movement statements are based on a poor understanding of how rall and ideological movements operate. could you tell us briefly,

elaborate on those points but also tell us the resources and the sources that you used to reach those conclusions and then specifically why do you believe the brotherhood means what it says? >> certainly i will address both of those questions. i do research on the brotherhood by meeting -- reading the documents and websites and reading their platforms and looking at the statements and then interviewing their leaders, interviewing some of the foot soldiers and interviewing people who left the organization sometimes split with the organization interviewing critics of the organization and interviewing scholars in the various countries that follow the organization. in terms of the caliphate there certainly are some foundational documents and texts for the brotherhood which to stress and

a lot of this has to do with the brotherhood founded in the late 1920's. was right after the collapse of the ottoman empire and the end of the caliphate. that wasn't necessarily universally recognized but the last possible clement, so there was an issue then about muslim unity how can this possibly publicly expressed and the were all kind of ideas for coming forward. the broader goal was a matter that will spell out, and when you look at the brotherhood tautological writing now the issue is simply reseeded in great importance. they never repudiated as far as i know. most ideological movements rarely say we used to be these ex but now we think that's wrong to just stop talking about something so that is something about how the tautological movements evil, but it is simply becoming something that is of secondary importance. >> the second statement to us about how was it that we know

what we know about the brotherhood i think we can take their statements in one sense that we have to read them extremely carefully. let me explain what i mean. first in the first place the alternative is sometimes to say okay when the brotherhood says something we don't like that serious and that doesn't mean they are lobbying. that isn't a very good or scholarly methodology. another is to say i know what they really think and if they say something contrary to that that only proves how devious they are. what i we have to realize about these movements is they are broad and they have all kinds of ideological tendencies within them and the way that they organize themselves to keep on the same page and the way that they talk to each other is often platform statements of right.

what i look for when i'm reading the brotherhood of a lot of statements are two things. number one, is this an authoritative position of the movement, because people in the movement or to have their positions and they will tell you this is my personal position. so, i looked to see is this coming from somebody in an authoritative position, or they presenting it as a personal opinion or of the movement so that you have to look at that? the second thing is how specific is it? and that is where you really get into the issue. sometimes it will be fairly vague and they are vague for all kind of reasons. sometimes they might be trying to please an interlocutor although i've met plenty of people in the muslim brotherhood who don't mind defending me and seemed to go out of their we doing so. so i'm not sure that is all that's going on there. often it's because the movement itself doesn't know and they get. tendencies in the movement itself city treat indigent and of the tape or of the differences with the general statements. i will give you just one very quick example on implementation

of sure we get in egypt if you ask doherty for the application of sharia law there's no way they can remain a member of the brotherhood and say no. that is a useful question and answers a wide was a follow-up with the question and it tends to get very specific. which institutions we think egypt are authorized to speak in the name of the sharia. what do you think of, what is the brotherhood position on the jurors' rooms of the constitutional court on the constitution we have to press them on the details and then you get much more revealing answers but when we see something authoritatively with some detail i think as they say that is a movement in the sense talking to itself and make up its own mind speaking authoritatively. >> professor mansour if the leadership provides a stronger force in egyptian policy-making what aspect is the greatest threat to the current u.s. foreign policy and how worried

should the u.s. be? >> i think what i've been trying to say all along is that the brotherhood is not really in a position to was a slip to threaten american interests because after all it is a political party and a country that is very poor and in depending on the united states. of course the issue we would be the most concerned about is the issue of the peace between egypt and israel and it's true the muslim brotherhood politicians have come out and made noises about wanting to resize the peace treaty as the chairman mentioned in her opening remarks. the thing the chairman did not mention however is that lots of other prominent egyptian politicians are saying very similar things. so this is not really an islamist position. he's well known to people fall in the egyptian seen and as a liberal egyptian who ran against

mubarak in 2005 and was jailed by that regime the question last month actually came out and said that he would like to subject camp david to the popular referendum so there is the broad swath of the egyptian society to require the organization and i don't think that they would go for the lottery and what is also forces us to keep in mind is that regardless of what the muslim brotherhood says or what he says ortiz of the people that get elected, their ability to actually make change on this particular issue, the issue of the piece of israel is limited because i think one of our colleagues mentioned early on, and i agree wholeheartedly the egyptian military will keep this as a very strong red line. there is no way that they would count in the democratically elected leaders coming near the piece of israel or threatening

that in any way. so i really do not believe that the downside of muslim brotherhood and sentenced for the electoral process have anything to do with america's core national interest. they have much more to do with what egypt will look like and how egypt will be run and that is another set of questions. >> one final question. mr. satloff, dr. satloff, you mentioned in your testimony that you recently visited egypt and that you said specifically you had an opportunity to speak to members of the cahal muslim brotherhood, and i'm interested to know how frequently were in contact with brotherhood members and how your most recent trip to the one you spoke about in your testimony, how your contact with brotherhood members this trip compares to the past context say five or ten years ago and do you see any change on the evolution? >> thank you, congressman.

first, a brief comment. i do company with dr. masoud on the last question. >> i want to focus on this question. i appreciate that the we are limited to the amount of time we have. >> i've been following the brotherhood the last 30 years i wrote a doctoral dissertation on politics and jordan dealing with muslim brotherhood on hamas 1988 and fall when egypt for 23 years i see the muslim brotherhood in egypt is doing that muslim parties do when they are poised to assert themselves which is that before elections they are moderating the words and after an election they often make terrible mistakes and he because they're so committed to their ideologies. when the muslim brotherhood party of jordan first achieved some political power and named ministers of education and other

higher political office is come ideologies trump to everything else. in the countries that have huge of the pervvijze problems computer educational problems, the muslim brotherhood of jordan was to ban falters from attending the girls sporting events. the was the most important issue on the agenda for the minister of education. and in egypt, we can hear now very intelligent -- >> can you tell me how your contacts with brotherhood members in egypt various today? than fifer ten years ago when you had contact. >> the point is today as they are placed for political gain, the most recent conversations all sound much more cony event blight dinham conversations five for ten years ago and the experience and similar countries in the same similar moments in countries around the middle east

is this is the moment when brotherhood petitions found the nicest the sweetest the latest because they are poised for political gain trying to reach the broadest political sport and the experience from other countries is that if indeed they achieve political game, and ideology does begin to trump practicality, the pragmatism of appealing the voting public. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. i applaud and thank the chairwoman for the statement it's important but today we are holding important to the to a hearing about a topic in a public forum of the chance of learning things enlightened about real threats is may be

nonexistent because we will be talking about the effects today i would imagine life year we would do little to add our voices to the already buzzing chatter of the public opinion. when we decide to target the scrutiny by the committee and do it in a public forum in which little can be done about the exaggerated threats i believe the risk is becoming a little more than talking heads and to entertain and inform more than to enlighten. in the form where the facts are limited we risk anyone who practices that. and intolerance can thrive. we create cable channels that might incite rather than understand. i believe it can be dangerous. we know that at self and a warrant or perceive intolerance, bigotry and prejudice against muslims in america are used as a

recruiting tool by those who truly want to harm american. we know that our enemies at home any suggested by this of muslims is an opportunity to set the wheels in motion to the nation's and the people harm. i think that it is a practical reason for us to tread carefully when we study and analyze religion. like every member of the committee, like every american i want everyone to to with absolute hundred% attention and dedication. that is the root of all the committee and we cannot compromise it. but an essential part of keeping american speeches using common sense and fairness when we examine information. we are not protecting america. we do not guard against the idea any active for faithful muslim who prioritizes the faith in their life is somehow a danger to america. i hope we will keep this in mind and understand who american muslims truly are. the ceo of the emergent

solutions to mckeithen allen and syria may be some of our homes are muslim. the car that turns out to be the times square on and over to the authors of the threat is muslim. many of our servicemen and women are muslim including who receive a purple heart and was killed in iraq in 2007. he joined the armed forces after september 11th. the majority of them are freedom loving american citizens just like the people in this room. they are american muslims and we should be proud of them. the devotion to the state, muslim, christian, jewish, any faith should be respected and indeed at mitered in america. i hope we keep this fact and for most of our mind every day and specifically. i would like to thank the

panelists who believe because we received -- have any of you received in classified secrets, intelligence information from the cia, fbi or intelligence gathering organizations of the united states of america in preparation for the testimony today? >> that should be important how we get through the intelligence and i believe we had one of the broadest intelligence gathering services in the world. do any of the panelists today believe that our intelligence services, any one of them has been so how could wind tore to old or duped by the -- the groups in egypt or here and

specifically the muslim brotherhood? >> anyone, like the cia, the fbi? >> i wouldn't know if we had because i'm not privy to the reports. i've had conversations regularly with people in the community and i naturally usually pressed by the statistically control of the questions they ask their very intelligence interlocutors. >> i just want to make sure that i -- while people have taken 12 and 11 and ten minutes i'm going to take a lot less. >> i don't think i would use the word duped but as i should in my testimony and my written statement i think that there has been an inconsistency to say the least within each agency i would argue of the jacinta questions

community, and that is part of -- >> an inconsistency shouldn't be fearful at this point about the intelligence gathering apparatus of the united states being somehow put winked were duped or fooled by the muslim brotherhood in egypt or the united states. >> to that extent, first let me start by saying i do not see whether the u.s. intelligence knows exactly -- >> this is the intelligence committee and while we are going to try to help them that is kind of our job is to then call them and say we have heard this at the hearing and you might want to correct these things shown to us in terms of -- >> so, i can't speak to this question of whether our intelligence agencies have been hoodwinked or not but since you are going to go back and speak to the people who do collect our

intelligence, you could actually raise a question that i've had and this is because i lack intelligence both in the sense of intelligence gathering and iq. so chairman, you mentioned this 1991 explanatory memorandum and lorenzo mentioned it as well a document written by this muslim brotherhood by which is a document that i read and i got it and read it and it seemed to be a document where this member of the muslim brotherhood in the united states is writing to his people back home and trying to encourage them to make the united states a kind of priority for the proposition political activism all kind of things. and the page in the document that caused the most controversy is the page that lists all of these organizations that lorenzo would call muslim brotherhood front organizations. and i guess the question -- and it's really just a question, it comes from me being a kind of

nit picking academic. if you look at the title of the page it says these are the organizations of us and our friends in america. the second line says in brackets imagine if they all marched together. i thought to myself what an odd thing for a kind of organization like the muslim brotherhood to be singing these are the arms of the muslim brotherhood octopus why would they need to be thinking whimsically and out the match at all these organizations could work together and this is important because it seems to me that list is a kind of desperation. at the end would movements or groups to emerge from the provider. i'm not making a factual statement i am just saying i interpret documents for a living and on that document i was sort of surprised we jump to say this is a list of malveaux tecum muslim brotherhood organizations because it seemed to the list of muslim organization the brotherhood would like to kind of organizing and coordinate

swipe at to find out if there is other information folks like me don't have. >> i have the list here said they are all working with each other and if indeed there is this power to do that. look, i think one of the people testified that the brotherhood says things to different people and as opportunistic and will say things to one group and then do something differently on another day. i've been in congress 19 years. a lot of people get elected and do just that. i assure you. after climbing it happens every year. what would be msnbc if they didn't catch us in the contradiction of what we say and opportunism. we try to of course to a higher measure. and i would simply suggest that back in chicago i'm going to

tell you anyone that says to their dad or promotes if i were to go back and say i think it's a great idea that not attend their daughter's soccer game i don't know how long they're going to last in politics. i just want to say if that's what they are presenting, they don't have a chance. >> it didn't work for them in jordan, either. >> and you know, in america there are a lot of religious perspectives put into our political system. as a matter of fact we almost closed on the government over abortion just last week, a strong political point of view and religious a point of view many americans hold and in which their government can do. so what i just want to make sure we are doing this in the right frame work and that we don't cause america to heighten the tension or there in society but that we do get the correct intelligence of that. thank you for being here.

>> with a hearing is not for asking them classified information mr. gutierez commodores this to get their opinion of what is going on in these countries that they know about because they are academics. we are going to have a closed hearing to talk with the people on the classified information side. >> professor brown and i guess professor satloff, outside a lot of the muslim brotherhood has been focused but of sight of egypt which is the most active for influential chapter of the muslim brotherhood, for it simple, what role does the jordanian brotherhood play in that country and is there an international muslim brotherhood? out of the arab will just don't know anything about them. in terms of the active political role probably the most prominent

is obviously hamas, an offshoot muslim brotherhood that really identifies with it and they are covering half, governing hadassah. second would be in kuwait where they said ministers to the government. they are a major political force in jordan with your very much in opposition force. in terms of the international organization, there is some sort of a formal international organization. when i go to countries and look for signs of this activity i don't really see any. it seems to be sort of coordinating and swapping experiences in a region dominated organization effectively, the international so that people in other countries kind of will sometimes look and say it's dominated by the egyptians we don't have any ownership of it on paper and the informal ties among muslim brotherhood movement in various countries can sometimes be

fairly strong and they often know each other and aware of each other's actions and doing some writing. but it's very, very loose organization. >> congressman, i would just add to my colleague and say the most important innovation is how technology has enabled the internationalization of the brotherhood and it's true that there is no common term of the muslim brotherhood, no secret little room people are pulling things behind windows but if you get to give for example who sits in qatar that can broadcast through a plethora of the networks throughout the arab and muslim societies and spread a certain a theological view that touches life from larocco to jordan to the gulf to the east asia and into europe doesn't have a difference of political network being created you do

have a very important transnational aspect and in jordan and the thick of subterranean syria and at one point the most powerful. >> [inaudible] -- there it is. okay, got it. is it dr. vidino? okay. you refer in what i tried to describe the western brotherhood. - we really need to be precise in describing organizations in

america. so what criteria did you use to develop western brotherhood? i'm trying to develop where in the muslim brotherhood is internationally as it relates to the united states, but when we have titles of what to make sure we fact that up. can you explain how you came to that phrase and what it means to you and why -- how it relates to the united states? >> it's kind of a loose term of course. what i refer to is organizations that topped off as the student organizations created by a handful of activists that came to study mostly american universities in the 50's, 60's and 70's who had experience in the brotherhood in their own countries and created these organizations. many of them left and went back to the middle east to their countries. some stayed here and these organizations proved and became some of the most visible of the

american bar from european muslim organizations. with time they have the fault of course credit for some of them is fair to say that the brotherhood origen was significant. for others i think that is not the case. if we talk and i agree with my other colleagues we're talking about an international global muslim brotherhood movement is an organization that is hardly functioning as a common term, very loose network and it's even looser when it comes to the offshoots here in the west. there are personal ties of course internet and other communication that helps the ties with their very much independent, so there's kind of a heritage in the brotherhood thinking but for some of the of moved partially away. the dewey team and again, we are talking about a certain number of organizations, so the -- this doesn't apply to them in the

same way. the do retain some and the methodology, the lotus a operandi of the brotherhood but they're very flexible so they understand that what was prescribed eight years ago in egypt and apply ebit for chicago in 2011 doesn't make a lot of sense. so they changed their tactics and their priorities and in their goals. so it is a very formal network to describe as a sort of western brotherhood. if the egyptian brotherhood becomes effective in shaping the foreign policies what issues would be most at odds with the current u.s. policy other countries as israel would be the concerns about that policy if they were brought in the foreign policy? >> sinnott about how the western border doherty nations would be involved but just the egyptian?

>> yes. >> i think it would unquestionably be the top one and we have seen as the other panelists have said some inconsistencies in the statement coming from the top brotherhood people which might indicate a certain level of being deceitful or on the other hand some people make them out to be so different voices within but arguably we would be the first when it comes to foreign policy. intelligence sharing with be the second issue that comes to mind. the relationship between the egyptian and american intelligence i suspect wouldn't be as it was in the past under the brotherhood influence government. that is the second that comes to mind. >> if i could just add some

specificity we tend to view the question of egypt as a black-and-white they keep the peace or don't but it's actually far more detailed. yes they will probably keep the peace but the security on the gaza border would be changed, the policy about counterterrorism in the peninsula would be changed. it was on the operation qualifying industrial would be changed, the policy of the sale of natural gas of israel will almost certainly be changed. the policy on the operation of the embassies in the two countries would be changed. all that could be changed while still keeping the peace. then there's other items. we saw just last month for the simple the egyptians permit it to an iranian naval ships that pass through the canal the first time in 30 years and this is not necessarily directed to the muslim brotherhood preference but the idea that egypt would shift its foreign policy orientation to the more islamist orientation from one that is

closer to the united states and its allies and it's definitely welcome to the muslim brotherhood world view the would be promoted in the public like public discourse and i think we would be will to see that in terms of u.s. egyptian military cooperation and other corporation egypt would have with western nations. >> [inaudible] >> i would like to pick up on what dr. satloff said. the muslim brotherhood would probably want to revise things like the qualified industrial zone or the natural gas to israel etc but it's important to know if we are going to make policy towards egypt is the focus of the forefront of calling for change on these things were not the muslim brotherhood. i mean, the fact is these are very unpopular policies there.

they would be extremely secular if you go and ask about natural gas to israel it will probably tell you know or the price would be higher. is the point is it's just we need to be very careful. we need to understand that democracy may lead to some divergence to how they perceive their interest and how we proceed our interest but if we label that a function of islam that we don't know what's going on and we will do damage to our own credibility trying to deal with that region. very important. >> thank you. dr. mansour i wanted to give you a chance, we cut you off when we were talking about ideology but i wanted to give you a chance to finish your statement. >> thank you. first of all, talking about muslims here, the majority of them are the best muslims

[inaudible] in doing the american values. american values are the theme justice and freedom so they are supposed to have a big role in forming the federal muslims in the middle east and other muslim countries. but what happened is some leaders established that influence and becomes a problem. second is talking about muslim brothers, we have to keywords. the first is [inaudible] data pulled and teach tradition

and we have another discourse for other discourse so in the field of politics religionists become dangerous because i want to talk with people about islam as peace but the same time jihadis have to do something and so secretly another key word that is infiltration, as we are talking about this, first of all

not muslim as individuals. again, as the muslim score so this infiltrated people through the mosques and education