this english, the translation 17 times a day is a brainwashed to look at fellow american as the enemy of god and according to the sharia that i have to kill him. what about -- what should be done? what should be done -- war, i suggest. how it should be done to establish an american agency that is specialized in war of ideas and to make american the super power of all of the ideas. : 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

to look at the world is facing this from within islam by share muslims and a very peaceful and discuss all of this for the reform and he's promoting islam and also to stop the dangers of fisheries -- of sharia. and the only way we have is to a rastus and we have four ways of arrest in egypt, and now it is

occupying in egypt, not only egypt but american interest in the middle east and because all this who are advocating there are maybe individuals but it is why we should be [inaudible] >> thank you very much. there we go. thank you all for being with us today. we appreciate your time in coming and this is ending the hearing. >> thank you all very much. [inaudible conversations] in

american society and something the professor didn't mention is a high percentage of young people in american society, i think the core of the population under 18, and increasingly what's fascinating to me is increasingly those young people are not only minority but are of mixed race and bringing different racial perspectives, different ethnic, different religious perspectives to what had previously been a black-white conversation in america. that conversation is now quite different than it's ever been. and we have a panel here to talk about some of these

issues, structural issues, racial issues, but i wanted to begin with a different sort of approach which is to talk for a second about the impact all of those changes are having on family structure in the united states, and how family structure is shifting with the shift in demographics and class in america, so omar, let me begin with you in asking -- let me introduce you. i don't think we're going to have any change in terms of rudeness over the years, but omar is co-founder and strategic founder and was founder of black planet.com, evidence of a new generation and you got a haircut the last time i saw you. >> i had dreadlocks last time we were onstage. so i'm growing up a little myself. >> i want to talk about the disillusion of the black family in specific, if you look at the

numbers of children born out of wedlock is 70% in the black community and 50% in the hispanic communicate by and 28% of the white community, so you're seeing a disillusion in the united states compounding the shifts in terms of racial and ethnic demographics. but how do you understand why the family structure is breaking down? >> so thank you, juan, for including me in this panel, and i think you set up question really nicely there in that this is an issue that disproportionately affects african-americans, single family households but is not unique to african-americans and is an issue that's an increasing question for any community. if you look at the black community, in 1965, 20% of households had -- were -- was a child born to a nonmarried couple and now you mentioned it, it is 70%. a dramatic change in a

relatively short period of time. and there are all sorts of other issues that then flow from that single parent households tend to be much poorer, there's all sorts of challenges that those children face in school, and i think part of the riddle for us as a country in thinking about race and class and sort of tangle that kind of unfolds in something like single parent households, on some kind of problems -- crisp answers, but in fighting jim crow c there was a clear dismantle legal segregation and that that would open up all sorts of doors and it did. or with voting disenfranchisement, we had a clear sense of have legal access to the ballot. for all an equal access to the ballot. but for issues where we have neighborhoods which have 70% or more folks living below the poverty line, where in kind of

a post industrial economy, there aren't clear -- you know, the engine of economic opportunity has sputtered to a halt. we don't have a clear answer, and what has sort of fueled those voids, particularly as things like the war on drugs has ratcheted up, is an era of mass incarceration where there are massive underground economies, so it's not just that women are having kids, you know, in the absence of marriage and somehow that's an issue for young women, but young men have a hard time finding jobs, and so turn in many ways -- >> let me quickly say, i remember being at lunch recently with president obama, and we were talking about the recession. and he said that in the recession of the 1980's, you saw black men go through stark unemployment rates and today we have stark unemployment rates, double what it is for whites and the overall unemployment

rate is still almost 9% in america today. so we should start talking about black men in specific, it is catastrophic by comparison. but for black women, it's less. so i'm thinking to myself, black women are outperforming black boys in school. black women are outperforming black men in terms of employment, could it be that black women have made the decision they don't need a husband? >> i think the research i've read suggests that black women revere marriage, and that a lot of poor women revere marriage and are waiting for the right partner to come. and that in an economy with where it's hard for men to find work, in an environment where there aren't good role models, where the people are sort of coming of age in very chaotic communities, it's women are making a rational choice that is, i want to get married but i need a guy who is going to be dependable and love me and show

up on -- you know, show up to be a father to my kids. >> that's a radical shift taking place here. in terms of who we are. and i wanted to ask you, lillian rodriguez lopez, the president of the hispanic federation, that when you look at the -- now profess >> spenderhuse said i have to be careful, would i speak of the spanish community, the hispanic community, what would you like me to use? >> you can use either one. for me that distinction is generational. i think younger latinos, younger hispanics prefer the word "latino" they find it friendlier and think it speaks more to their sort of reality within the united states. if you talk to people who are older, they're more comfortable with hispanic or spanish because that's what they really grew up with. so it's really an age thing that's happening there. as it relates. >> given your vanity, i think i'll call you latino. >> ok.

>> all right. >> you're a wise man. >> so ms. rodriguez lopez, with omar we were talking about 70% born out of wedlock and the destructural breakdown, the destructure of the black family, but in the latino community, 50%. there's not much difference. but i always think, and now, again, i may be dealing in stereotype here, but i always think the latino community has very strong families and comes as a shock to me when you realize such a high out of wedlock birth rate exists. >> you know, that's interesting the way this is being posed. i listen to the question and i listen to the response. first of all, implies if you're not married you're not a family. and so maybe we need to start thinking about what is the construct of family and without getting too political think of the gay agenda, they are families and they're not married. you have a lot of people who are young couples who don't

want to get married because, quite frankly, they believe it's a failed institution. so rather than say oh, they don't want to get married or the partners are not out there or we don't have reliable men in the african-american or the latino community, i dispute that. you know, there's a lot of very strong families and a lot of strong partnerships. people just don't want to have the paper anymore because they believe it just creates all kinds of tensions, and difficulties and that it is a failed constitution. -- failed institution. one, two, it is different. let's be honest. it is different. my grandmother, my mother, they stayed in marriages, there was a different set of values, per se, around what marriage meant and what it meant not to be married. they put up with a lot of situations that were occasionally very, very difficult. some great but some very

difficult in terms of family dynamics that nowadays people say good or bad, sad or great for families, you know what, i'm not putting up with this anymore. and they divorced very quickly or they never enter into the institution to begin with, so there's a lot of things that are happening just in general in the 21st century that are really affecting the institution of marriage and how we define family. >> what struck me in your comment was the role of women. that, again, talking to omar about the black community, we talked about women outperforming men. it's also true in the latino community, and you're saying that in many cases, i don't know why you call marriage a failed institution, i want you to tell me that. but you also say women are making a decision that they don't need the paper, as you put it. so is it that the role of women in the latino community has radically shifted as we've seen them become more american, in

fact, the largest minority in america. >> first of all, i say that i believe in marriage. so i want to be very clear that i think it's a great institution, but we have a very high divorce rate in this country. so what's happening is people are not married because they don't want -- they figure, oh, if the divorce rate is so high, why even get married? >> but the quick answer would be children. >> yes. i agree. >> what you see in the research is that for young -- for a lot of low income women, marriage and children are uncoupled. that in the old model income. sex, children were all tightly bundled together under marriage. and now that's totally uncoupled. >> so what's going in the latino community? >> i think for latino women there is a certain amount of independence. and that they find themselves in situations to do things. if you either find yourself in a situation where your career

is progressing, you haven't met someone you want to marry. i want to be clear because i think there are very good men out there. but you just haven't found, quote, unquote, your life partner, the person you want to marry. and maybe that's why they're choosing to have children outside of marriage. >> very briefly, when i am talking to omar or you about breakdown of family structure. i'm tying in my mind the stats we heard from professor spenderhuse about lower income, less resources to help those children move forward in a society. do you see it that way? >> i see a lot of women who are educated, career-minded, having children without a marriage and without partners. i can't give you the percentage, and i'm going to look to see what the full census data shows. but they're out there, too. i just don't want to victimize the poverty, the low income because i think there are too

many factors that are really switching and shifting the way we live our lives, the way we make our decisions, and what you said, a whole decumming of what -- decoupling of what comes first. i graduate, i get married, i buy a house, we have two kids, i get a dog. all that is out the window. now what you do is i get married, i have the kid, it doesn't work out, he leaves, the kid goes and lives with him for a week, he comes back to my house for the week. i keep the dog. i'm divorced. the dog is now with him, too. because the child is out of the house. so we have these really fascinating ways of managing our life. we're not cookie cutter. and that's scary sometimes that we're not cookie cutter but i think life is a little bit more complex than we want to make it seem, today. >> i want to come back -- this is so fascinating because i wonder what the impact on our children, when you look at the poverty rates in the united

states among children, and especially minority children, they're astronomical. >> you raise a good point. i don't want to minimize this. we should also talk about the impact of the lack of that construct on our children. it does have an affect. a positive effect on them. >> especially with media that projects at times negative images for those kids to emulate in the absence of role models. but i wanted to come to daisy kahn the executive director of the american society for muslim advancement. thank you for joining us today. >> thank you. >> we appreciate you being here. when i think about american muslims in the context i've been discussing here, i realize that american muslims come from different ethnic, racial, linguistic backgrounds. but you're very much a part of us as america. and i think about how does marriage or intermarriage work in the muslim community? >> first of all, i must say that the family unit is highly

revered in the muslim community, whether it is a local african-american community that has been a muslim community for generations, or even the convert community or immigrant community. these are like broadly speaking are the three major communities that we have. and we still want the paper. we still have not gone to that americanization where the family unit has split up and is no longer considered to be valuable. so it's held in very high regard, and so -- and it's the -- and women are the glue to the family. and usually the women are also the glue to the community. so because we have highly educated women at the forefront of the families, they tend to be that glue that keep the family together. >> you think that women in your community are more highly educated in the black or the latino community. >> actually, they are. statistically, they're on par with even muslim men and they also earn -- they are highly educated, people like myself,

that have careers. and so -- and those who aren't traditional women tend to be very educated about their religion, so they know that religion should be empowering to women. so that level of awareness kind of permeates into the family and keeps the family structure glued together. so this is the contribution i think muslims will make to america is to have a stable family tradition. >> so we don't see the high rates of out of wedlock birth in the muslim community we're seeing in the black and latino, even in the white community, given as i said it's about a 1/3. >> it's very rare but it's possible that it might increase and there might be a reason for that. that is because we've seen a very high rate of increased marriages. because our children are highly educated and go to colleges and universities, and what happens? they fall in love. >> sex doesn't happen yet. >> no, not yet.

that's later. that's after marriage. but i mean, i don't know what happens but -- but what happens is they fall in love and, you know, and love has no boundaries and you can't prevent people from marrying, so we're seeing an increase in interfaith marriages. and this is kind of work in progress. we have not reached a stage where it's a critical mass of people that are getting married in this way, but we're seeing a trajectory towards interfaith couples and how that will manifest in the generation after is something that we will have to see. >> and do you see right now the kind of -- you talked about interfaith, but are they also a matter, then, of interracial because that's one of the big shifts we're seeing in the country, intermarriage leads to a new category, literally, of children who are multiracial in growing numbers, as we saw from the chart dr. spenderhughes

showed. >> we're seeing a lot of intrafaith marriages between shi'ia-sunni. i remember i had husband conducted a shi'ia-sunni wedding with, maybe a black and white marriage, you know, in the early days, it was that traumatic, so much so the families of the two sides did not come to the wedding because they couldn't imagine the shi'ia were marrying a sunni and both were muslim and both were doctors. but that was 10 years ago and now we see a lot of shi'ia-sunni marriages, we see, you know, black-white marriages, jewish-muslim marriages, catholic-muslim apparentlies, and of course we're also seeing interracial apparentlies because islam sort of is colorblind and we do come from more than 50 countries and what unites us, we're very diverse ethnically, nationally, but what unites us is our faith. we have -- that is the glue that keeps the community together.

so if you can walk into any mosque, you can see the united nations there, and invariably when you have that type of deep diversity and people are in this community together, you know, which is representative of all faiths and all ethnicities, people do fall in love and they come together and so you see black-white-muslim marriages. >> quickly, what percent of the population in the united states is arab? >> i believe it's less than 15%. >> less than 15%. so in terms of intermarriage? >> between? >> anybody. do they marry outside? >> oh, we don't have percentages yet but if i have to do my own sort of statistic, you know, 10 years ago it was mostly muslim-muslim marriages, between two muslims, and now we're seeing at least a 25% increase in marriages, interracial marriages. >> i want to introduce sunny garr, the president of exelon power.

and sunny, you're a first generation asian american. and i wanted to ask in terms of this tremendous mix that we've been talking about this morning and family issues, what it's like to be in that first generation, because one of the things that the demographers increasingly talk about is not the melting pot anymore, they talk with the -- about the american mosaic, different pieces, different parts, people coming here as part of a global social structure were a global economic structure. they talk about america as a salad bowl, all having distinct identities, the lettuce, the tomatoes, the carrots, retaining distinct identity but working together. what's it like to come into this mosaic or salad bowl? >> well, first of all, let me say, lillian, your comments reminded me a great quote from rita rudner, i date a man and i

ask myself, is this the man i want my kids to spend their weekends with? [laughter] >> anyway, i think it's an interesting question, and i'll go back to kind of a simplistic model charlie laid out in terms of the different factors, you know, the individual, the cultural, and then the structural. so i think those are very important when you talk about, at least my personal experience, so on the individual level, like many, at least indian americans, you know, our parents came here well educated and had a significant drive towards achievement. which set the context of which we grew up in our family, great stories, two of my eldest sisters were born in i said yeah and came over when they were 6 and 8 and knew heartlandly -- hardly any english and my sister finished first in her class and my dad asked who finished second? and my sister finished second

and then my dad said this country's gone to hell. i think that's the first piece. >> the first piece for you? >> the family piece. >> and the strength of the family, way you're talking about are tiger parents coming from -- >> exactly. i think that's an important element in this. the second one is the structural. and i grew up in ohio, outside of toledo, and we had all the benefits in terms of good schools, good infrastructure, we didn't have high unemployment, we had good unemployment, we had safety and security. and so that was an important element that i think you can't take for granted as we talk about this notion of asians being model minorities and such. i think we have to temper that with the second element which is the structural. i think the third one which is the most fascinating to me is the cultural one. not cultural within what it meant to be -- what we brought from india is much. i think that's important. i'm a little hesitant to generalize and say indians believe in education and

indians value these things. i think when you have a very -- the cream that comes over, it's hard to generalize about the populations from which you came. so cultural, i'm meaning more of our acceptance within society. and i think where we had the benefit, where my family and myself, we weren't trying to disprove a negative. we weren't starting in a hole. there was almost a neutral association with who we were. there weren't preconceived either conscious or unconscious biases against us. >> so you didn't feel that somehow people would view you as a person of color as black in the black-white structure? >> yeah. i don't think we -- at least from my personal experience that was not the case. we were more of an oddity. we were more kind of a neutral that was introduced into this salad that it wasn't somebody that said, i don't like cucumbers, it was like, what is this new tomato here? and i may be taking that analogy a little too far. >> right. [laughter] >> i think it had two major

outcomes for us, and i think for my family as well as the first generation asian community is we had the ability to really change perception. right? if the positive intergroup relationships were a positive, they weren't necessarily reducing a negative. and so then you do have these sweeping generalizations of indian families love their families and they love education, and so they get this very positive, almost positive stereotype that comes out of it that leads to that notion of model minority. i think the other outcome, for me at least, was somewhat a loss of identity. it was a little bit less of the salad bowl because i remember when i was a senior in high school, ghandi came out and i was horrified. we showed it at our school and the last thing i wanted is all the kids to watch ghandi because all of a sudden i thought, great, they're going to think of me as the guy running around in a loincloth because they were protected from a broader image of what it meant to be indian and i saw that as being somewhat

negative, even though what ghandi achieved wasn't but just the context of india at the time. so i think that was a big piece for me at least is losing a piece of identity in terms of integrating and assimilating into america. >> well, you wanted to make a comment? >> yeah, i -- because this panel is on the state of race. and i think, i appreciate very much what you said, and thank you for that. when -- i'm puerto rican. when my family came over, they came with strong, strong values. >> right. >> of marriage and tradition, and education, and they pushed us to achieve. and so what happens with most communities is not all the time, but too many times, the more you live in a place and you get acclimated, sometimes you start relying on the systems and the structures that are not the most beneficial structures for a community, for those family structures. so i guess my reaction, the reason i want to comment is --

and, you know, i don't want to speak for the african-american community, the black community, but we're not any different. you know, we came over, wherever you came from, whether you're coming from the south, up north, or whether you're coming from an island, the virgin islands, or guam or wherever, puerto rico, cuba, and you come in with strong, strong traditions and a lot of our communities still have those strong traditions, what has happened is to a certain degree or to a great degree is you start absorbing some of the cultural norms of the american culture. and there are things in the american culture that we don't want to talk about that are more acceptable, like divorce, or children out of wedlock, than would be acceptable in our countries of origin, quite frankly, that's one thing i want to say that because i don't want it to become skewed with what's happening here. the other thing is we have

younger populations. you are absolutely right. we have younger populations. those younger populations who are growing up in poverty, that don't have the same role models also are not being provided with the same safety net or the kinds of supports or guidance that maybe i had when i -- and i was born here -- growing up in new york in the 196o's. so we don't want them to mimic certain behaviors or do certain things that we want them to achieve. but we're not giving them the programs and services they necessarily need. why do we have high out of wedlock rates? we have a high teenage pregnancy rate. >> teenage pregnancy declined in the last 20 years. >> not in the latino community. it's on the uptick. it's on the uptick in the latino community. and i just -- and i want to say this because this is important. but we don't want to do -- i don't want to socialize or go into social issues but we don't want to do contraception or sexual education in schools and

we need to realize that these are important things and in the latino community, it is on the rise. >> yeah. i think the larger issue is we actually don't know how to solve a lot of these problems and that's the new american dilemma in a way is we have a level of entriveraged poverty that we do not know -- entrenched poverty that we do not know how to resolve in any direct way. so in some ways as great an accomplishment as the civil rights movement was, it's small potatoes in some ways compared to the new american dilemma of a rich country and a poor country mashed together where we actually have -- we do not have the economic engines, we do not have the educational institutions, we do not have the infrastructure to help a persistent class of poor people become middle class. and that's -- that to me is really sort of the big riddle for america in the 21st century. >> hang on. what occurs to me in this context here to keep our conversation focused is that we

hear from people who say, you know, we came to this country from cultures that revered marriage and kept it at a high -- in a high place, women would put up with a lot of stuff in order to preserve the marriage. i think that's what i heard you say. >> right. we also have latinos for the most part have a female dominated culture and the mother as 9 matriarch, extremely strong, driving the family. >> and i kind of heard you say that women play a strong role in terms of that muslim community and are maintaining that marriage and therefore, the children have some advantage there. >> yes. but what i wanted to mention is what sonny said was very important because we, the muslim community, considers itself to be a model community in the united states. so the perception of itself is very high so the motivation is also very high. however, we are at the opposite end of the indian community, for instance. we always have to disprove the negative. so that is having a major setback for us in terms of

institution-building. so we're constantly having to disprove that we are not future terrorists, that we really are not foreigners, you know, we belong here. so that's having some sort of a negative affect on. but that also makes us retreat back into the family. >> into the family. >> and the community. so it's making the community stronger. >> but are you separate, then, from the black and hispanic experience, is this a different experience for the increasing number of muslims, asians, in the united states than we have typically thought, you know, wait a minute, this is a minority experience, maybe that's now an anachronistic

we now have a critical mass of muslims the live . going from the the judeo- christian ethic, as we have more muslims and buddhists and hindus, we will go to the children of abraham, children of god experience. we are not a racial doc. >> if i am thinking about -- your level of family structure remains intact and is what might -- much higher than what i am hearing and the black and latino community. >> we had a higher number of group of people that integrated into the country. the borrower is very high -- the bar is very high. i have a taxi driver in the ivory coast. i always ask him, what do you

want your children to be? his bar is so much higher for his kids because he is the godfather of his community. he sees me and our family and other families. so the bar was set very high. everyone else wants their children to be lawyers, doctors, investment bankers. they are not settle and for the -- even the street vendor, why are you working seven days a week? i want my son to become a lawyer, to become president. they have embraced the american ethos. if i work hard, i can get my mortgage and get my own business and my children can thrive. >> how do blacks said into that ethos? do you see that is separate from the black experience? you do not want to be a minority

in america. want to be on par with people, you do not see herself locked into the old dynamic. >> we actually see ourselves as a community had that can help america build itself. >> but are you separate from that history? >> well, right now we feel like a minority. we feel like, for the first time on a my life, i can sympathize with communities that have gone through difficult challenges. and the challenge of acceptance. it is something i have personally experienced last year. it is the first time i actually realized what he theories of on acceptance. i think most muslims have experienced. we thought we were a thriving community, we work and treating. >> a do you see that as the equivalent of the black experience? >> of course it is. it is the same as at the

catholic experience, the jewish experience. it is one of acceptance. we want to be treated as equals, no newcomers. >> you see it fitting into the framework of civil-rights in america. >> first of all, i want to make sure i did not miss a beat. i was not saying our family values were better than anybody else's -- i want to make sure i didn't misspeak. i think it is very difficult, i cannot generalize for the indian-american community. but i think it is important because each one of those legs of this tool are is stabilizing or barrier-inducing. you can have a great family values, but if you grew up on the structure were there are not great schools, those of values become a very hard to overcome those. i just want to make sure i was

clear on that point. >> of the question then becomes, if you have a larger family breakdown occurring in america, and especially on the terms of american communities, what demands are we putting on schools and other structures and to compensate for the absence of models?income or role >> i think that is exactly the right question. if you take the three-legged stool. if you look at schools in inner- city communities and i spent a few years working and the robert taylor homes a neighborhood. what we're asking schools to do, and the neighborhood i grew up i knew we asked schools to educate. in these neighborhoods, they have to become a surrogate families. there are lunch and breakfast programs, behavioral programs. that is a pretty tall order. i am not sure that you can compensate for a lot

of changes in the family structure. >> let's see what others think. >> i was going to say i agree with you. i appreciate it what you said. i thought your comments were excellent. >> here's more. >> here. i mean, my work is all around health and human services and social services for the most part. that was what i was getting to be for where you have the young people, children and adolescents with all of these complex and needs. they do not have the same family structures. it does affect them, because then you have to create a whole a safety net around them to try to meet all of these needs and the demands of what if they really do need in order to be successful adults. i do not know the school can do that anymore. then you do not have the church

as well as active in the lives of young people as they used to be, either. and that is a strong structure. what we are looking at is how you create some form of programs or a community structure that really works to integrate not only children but their parents? and i think that is important for the latino community as well, that people are integrated. this is interesting to me, because i think for many years part of the debate was really a white-black debate. now you have the hispanics and the muslims and the agents, and now it is like, maybe we should be talking about the state of race. yes, we really should, because it is very different. maybe what it will lead us to is a conversation about human beings and humanities and less about race and all of these other distinctions, because what

i am sitting here and you see me starting to get anxious is addressing,'re not at the end of the day, we all want the same things for our families and our children. what i was trying to say before, and maybe it was lost was, that we do, with the very same of values and attitudes and traditions and with people who were educated. but as our numbers grow and you become more acclimated or acculturated, you see a strata. and everybody starts falling into all these different areas where you do have people who are in poverty and you have less of a middle class. and i think what is happening to the latino and african american community is we are becoming a lot of the american strata. we think everyone who is caucasian is doing well. they are not. they are not. we should go into some very