innovative and showed america as an innovative country. that used books and stories to inspire going to the frontier and that could be literally or intellectually. if you'd like to participate in online discussion with roberta schaefer, associate librarian at the library of congress, one that we will then air on booktv, we would like to hear from you. e-mail us at booktv at c-span are untransformed. >> said on c-span2, white house adviser john brennan talks about u.s. counterterrorism efforts in yemen. former federal prosecutor andrew mccarthy accuses a state department official of having ties to the muslim brotherhood. and the head of the tsa discusses airline security at the meeting of the airline pilots association.

>> president obama's counterterrorism adviser, john brennan, defended the use of joan attacks in yemen, saying that al qaeda affiliated militants in the country remain a threat to the united states. remarks at the council of foreign relations, mr. john brennan also did not rule out u.s. involvement in syria, and called on congress to pass a cybersecurity bill. mr. brennan was with the cia for 25 years. >> i am margaret warner and i think most of you are aware of the floor rules, please turn off your cell phones and pagers, which i am doing so myself. i ask that you not even put it on vibrate because that could interfere with the system. this meeting is on the record. it is my pleasure today to introduce today's guest, john brennan. he is assistant to the president for homeland security.

and counterterrorism. and a deputy national security adviser. he is the chief advisor to the president of counterterrorism strategy, as well as policy and implementation. and he also coordinates all the homeland security related activities throughout the executive branch. preparing for and responding with cyberthreats of terror attacks. he will open today with remarks about u.s. politics in the yemen and you now have a conversation for 15 minutes or so and we will open it up to questions for the audience on a wide range of topics. mr. brennan? [applause] thank you very much, margaret read. thank you everyone for being here today. it certainly is a pleasure to see so many familiar faces, both from inside and outside of government who i hope or fear because of their abiding and

deeply rooted interest in u.s. yemeni relations. on the subject of yemen, when it comes out, it is often through the prism of the terrorist threat that is emanating from its borders. for good reason. al qaeda has an active affiliate, the peninsula. it has murdered and killed and kidnapped people, and poses a threat against u.s. aviation and the united states breadlike vitamin discussion of yemeni and counterterrorism efforts can focus exclusively on the use of one counterterrorism tool in particular. a targeted strike at the white house, we have always taken a broad view, both of yemen's challenges and u.s. policies. two months ago, however, a number of experts wrote an open letter to president obama arguing that there is a

perception that the united states is focused on the exclusion of yemen's broader political economic and social ills. among the recommendations, that u.s. officials conveyed, making a commitment to the yemenite transition and stability. it is in that spirit that joining him today. both in my official capacity and as someone who has come to know and admire yemen and its people over the last three decades. i want to begin with a snapshot of where yemen is today. since assuming office, president abdu rabu mansour hadi and his party have made progress of implementing two key elements that ended the rule of ali abdullah saleh and provided a roadmap for transition and reform. as part of the military reorganization, powerful commanders, including some of the former president's family and supporters have been dismissed or reassigned. discussions are underway to bring the military under unified

civilian command. in just two days, two days ago, president abdu rabu mansour hadi issued a decree that issued several brigades from under the command of his people. he has appointed a committee with representatives from political parties, women's organizations, the southern movement, and oppositionists in the north. that committee, for the first time, met this week. on the security front, government forces have achieved important gains against aqap. their flag no longer flies. as one resident said after aqap, it is like seeing darkness lifted from our lives after a year. checkpoints are being removed in yemen, public services have resumed in major cities and public service is getting paid.

the energy infrastructure is slowly being restored, including the pipeline which supplies half of their oil. at the same time, yemen continues to face extraordinary challenges. balance remains a tragic reality for many yemenites. we saw this last week and in an outrageous suicide attack that killed dozens of innocent yemenis. moreover, yemen remains one of the poorest countries on earth and conditions have only been compounded by last years of people. most yemenis lacked access to basic service, including electricity and functioning water. unemployment is as high as 40%. chronic poverty is now estimated at 54%. 10 million people, nearly half of yemen's population goes to bed hungry every night. one in 10 children does not live to the age of five. president obama understands that the challenges of yemen are

intertwined. he has insisted that policy development is as important as security, and focus on a clear goal to facilitate a democratic transition while helping yemen advanced so it can supported citizens encounter aqap. you see our conference of approach and the numbers. this year alone, u.s. assistance to yemen is more than $337 million. over half his money, $178 million, is for political transition, humanitarian assistance and development. let me repeat that. more than half of the assistance provided to yemen is the political transition, the humanitarian assistance and development. in fact, this is the largest amount of civilian assistance the united states has ever provided to yemen. any suggestion that policy toward yemen is dominated by security and counterterrorism efforts is amply not true.

today i want to walk through the key pillars of our approach. first come united states has been and will remain a strong and active supporter of the political transition in yemen. that is why president obama called on president ali abdullah saleh to step down last year. having consistently asked for an a peaceful transfer of power, we have worked hard to help sustain the transition. facilitate elections and promote an inclusive national dialogue. this past may, president obama issued an order authorizing sanctions against those in that situation. we will continue to push for the full implementation of the gcc agreement. during this delicate transition, we call on all yemenis, especially abdu rabu mansour hadi and nidal hasan and ali

abdullah saleh to abide by the letter and the spirit of the gcc agreement so that yemen can move towards a more inclusive democracy. as we support this transition, a comprehensive approach has a second pillar. helping governments and institutions upon which yemen's long-term progress depends. despite decades of rule by one-man, it has a foundation on which is building. the country has a tradition of opposition political parties. a vibrant society. independent media, and leaders who plays the larger national interest above politics, religion, sex or tribe. president hadi is one such leader. this year i met with him twice in yemen and spoke to him numerous times. i have been impressed with his commitment to his nation and integrity and willingness to make difficult decisions to move his country forward. even at great risk to himself. the yemeni people are indeed very fortunate to have president hadi as their leader. we are helping to strengthen

yemeni institutions so that they become more responsive, effective and accountable to the people. we are partnering to expand essential services, improve efficiency, combat corruption, and enhance transparency. we will support the reform of law enforcement and judicial institutions and the rule of law read beyond government, we are proud to continue our long tradition of helping disgruntled role of civil society to conduct parliamentary oversight, raise public awareness, and yemen's transition. empowering women, provide leadership and advocacy training and build the capacity up little parties to engage in political discourse. of course, lasting political and economic progress is impossible, so long as half of the yemenis are men and 10 malnourished and struggling to survive another day. that is why the third pillar approach is immediate humanitarian relief. this year, the united states is providing nearly $110 million in

humanitarian assistance to yemen. most of it through the un's humanitarian response plan. this makes the united states the single largest provider of humanitarian assistance to yemen. it is allowing the u.n. and ngo partners to provide food and food vouchers, proved improved food vouchers and other urgent needs being met. they are providing more than $749 and food security programs, enabling you to set to scale up the assistance for starving children. with u.s. support, unicef and the world health organization completed a large-scale immunization campaign, which may have successfully halted a polio outbreak that began last year. yet even with these efforts, some in the yemenis remain in desperate need. we commend the european union for doubling the atm in and urge other donors to follow suit by contributing more to the u.n.

humanitarian response plan, which is less than 50% funded. this will provide critical and the lifesaving relief to millions of yemenis. as we help address the immediate humanitarian needs, we are partnering with yemen in the port area. the economic reforms and development necessary for long-term progress. in fact, $60 million in transition assistance and economic development that we are providing this year include vital assistance to improve the delivery of basic services, including health, education and water. we are helping yemen address a health gap by renovating health clinics, providing medical equipment, training midwives and doctors in maternal and child health, and supporting community health education. we are helping to introduce more productive techniques and provide you with training, job placement and entrepreneurial programs. we are helping yemen rebuild the structure and promote micro- finance and small businesses. we are encouraging efforts to stabilize the economy and undertake reforms that will help

raise living standards promote a stable economy. following the success against aqap in the south, we are supporting the yemen government's efforts to repair war-torn infrastructure and to rehabilitate unity. for its part, yemen must have a plan to address unemployment and poverty, as well as develop diversified and reform its economy. including combating corruption. with government revenues and donor funds, so they are not awarded to private interests at the expense of the yemeni people. international donors want to know that their contributions are misappropriated in the projects they fund are part of a comprehensive plan. providing a vision of where yemen's plan to take the country will help them to invest wisely. this brings me to the final pillar of the comprehensive approach to yemen. improving security and combating the threat of aqap.

put simply, yemen cannot succeed politically, economically, socially. so long as the cancerous growth of aqap remains. >> ultimately, long-term battle in yemen must be fought and won by yemenis. to their great credit, president hadi and his government, including defense minister and interior minister has made combating aqap a top priority and have forced aqap out of their stronghold of southern yemen. so long as aqap seeks to implement its murderous agenda, we will be a close partner with yemen in meeting this common threat. just as our approach to yemen is multidimensional, our counterterrorism approach involves many different tools. diplomatic, intelligence, military, homeland security, law enforcement, and justice. with our yemeni and international partners, we have

put unprecedented pressure on aqap. travel to yemen has been disrupted. plans have been ported and key leaders who have targeted u.s. and yemeni interests have met their demise, including anwar al-awlaki, the chief of operations. the attention has focused on one tool in particular. sometimes using remotely powered aircraft, known as drones, the obama administration classified the joint efforts that have resulted in direct action against aqap operatives and senior leaders. this spring i addressed the subject of strikes at length and why the strikes are illegal, ethical, wise and highly effective. today i simply say that all of our people in yemen are in concert with the yemeni government.

when direct action is taken, every effort is made to avoid any civilian casualties. contrary to the conventional wisdom, we see little evidence that these actions are generating widespread anti-american sentiment or recruits for the aqap. in fact, we see the opposite. the yemenis are equal to work with us. those who have been freed from the hellish grip of aqap on more eager to work with the yemeni government. in short, targeted strikes against the most senior and dangerous aqap terrorists are not the problem, they are part of the solution. even as we partner against the immediate threat by aqap, we are helping yemen building capacity for its own security. we are spearheading the international effort to help reform and restructure yemen's military into a professional, unified force. in fact from the $159 million in assistance we provide to yemen this year, almost all of it is for training and equipment to build to capacity. we are empowering the yemenis

with the tools they need to conduct operations and ensure counterterrorism operations are conducted lawfully and in a manner that respects human rights and makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties. finally, i would note that our approach to yemen is reinforced by broad support from the international community. throughout the last year, the gulf cooperation council, especially saudi arabia, e.g. 10, the friends of yemen, united nations and the diplomatic community have come together to push for a peaceful solution of the crisis and to facilitate a successful transition. the international community has threatened u.n. sanctions against those who would undermine the transition, provided humanitarian relief and offered assistance to the national dialogue and electoral reform. international partners, including the uk, germany, china, russia, have pledged aid. saudi arabia alone over

$3.25 billion on top of the significant fuel grants a day to yemen to offset the losses caused by a tax on the interceptor. as such, close quarter nation with their international our international partners will be critical in the years ahead. these are the pillars of our conference of approach to yemen. supporting the transition, strengthening governors institutions, providing relief, and encouraging economic reform and development and improving security and combating aqap. taken together, our efforts send a message to the yemeni people that is unmistakable. the united states is committed to your success. we share the vision that guides so many yemenis. where all citizens, shia and sunni, old and young have a government that is democratically responsive and just. we have no illusions. given the command of challenges that yemen continues to face, progress towards the future will take many years.

yet we have learned anything in the past two years, it is that we should not underestimate the will of the yemeni people. despite the seemingly insurmountable obstacles in front of them, hundreds of thousands of men and women took to the street and engaged in political and social movements for the first time in their lives. in so doing, they helped pave the way for change, which just two years ago would have seemed unimaginable. that yemen did not dissolve into an all-out civil war. it is a testament to the courage, determination, and resilience of the yemeni people. it shows that the future may not be determined by violence. the people of yemen have a very long and hard road ahead of them. but they have shown that they are willing to make the journey, and take all the risks that entails. as they go forward in pursuit of the security, prosperity and dignity they so richly deserve, they will continue to have a partner in the united states of america. thank you very much. [applause]

>> thank you, mr. brandon, for that conference of laying out of yemeni and united states policy. it is very interesting. you mentioned that helping yemen move towards a transition to a government that is democratic and responsive, and more just, i am just wondering about the partners in this transition, which is saudi arabia. what states are involved in partnering with the u.s. -- to what degree will saudi arabia allow apportioning of a more vibrant, democratic, model in yemen. with the kinds of institutions that you cite, you know, flourishing political parties, opposition for the free press, at least. >> saudi arabia has done more for yemen and the other countries in the world.

it shares an important border with saudi arabia. it was one of the key drivers within the gcc to force the agreement. it calls for this political transition to take place, embedded in that agreement is political reform. whenever i go out to yemen, i invariably will go to saudi arabia, sometimes before as well as after, because what this saudis and sunnis want to do is make sure that we need to work together. it needs to be a team approach to the problem. i have found only support coming out of saudi arabia, the other saudi officials, to continue along this path. as i mentioned my remarks, yemen has a history of having a vibrant civil society. they have political parties they are that have been there for quite some time. so moving into this new phase, i

think what the saudis want to do is to make sure that yemen is able to take advantage of the foundation that it has already been make sure that it evolves in a peaceful way and one that is, i think, consistent with what the region is trying to accomplish. >> so you are saying that their agenda is more? >> absolutely. president ali abdullah saleh agreed to step down before his term is up. he agreed to the gcc agreement, allowing the elections take place and president hadi to assume office. the saudi's realize that getting ali abdullah saleh out of the position is not in itself a remarkable achievement. in order for yemen to go along the path of progress, and needed a much broader effort underway. >> how would you compare president ali abdullah saleh with president abdu rabu mansour hadi in regards to the aqap? they used to refer to ali

abdullah saleh is a great partner in yemen. >> i think what we refer to is that we partner with yemen against aqap for a number of years. and with a lot of counterterrorism, partnerships, there are ups and downs. we are experiencing that across the world right now as well. there are times under the former president where there were some strong disagreements about the need to have a sustained effort against aqap. and anybody who knows yemen knows that there is such a mix of politics and tribes and so many different things that come to bear within yemen, and at times i think the yemen government, board president hadi, would see how certain counterterrorism activities operations would affect their political equities. that can't be part of the effort. what i found with president hadi is that he has a singular focus and expects a real determination. even if he doesn't get help from the outside world, al qaeda is

killing yemeni men women and children on a sustained basis and he is going to battle them, you know, as much as he can. what we have found there is a continuity of effort and there are not these other considerations that come to account. >> so you are seeing him as a more consistent and dependable partner? >> there has been exceptional consistency that president hadi has shown. >> let's move on to syria. just in your daily look at terrorism, increasing reports, not just media and the outside government, increasingly extremist, coming in from all over the world, joining the rebel cause. could that threatened u.s. security interests? do you see a potential threat they are? >> terrorism might. >> the history of al qaeda has been that it has tried to take advantage of environments that are either lawless or are going

through political change or chaos. you know, we have seen that they grew in iraq, we have seen that they have taken advantage of the situation in somalia and yemen because of the political problems there. syria is no different. it says that they are very concerned about the al qaeda types and they have said that they are not going to allow al qaeda to take advantage of the situation there. what we have to be very mindful of is that al qaeda, the worldwide enterprise will be looking for opportunities to exploit that opportunity for them. >> so how does the funding model that is currently in operation, you know, it seems that that could contradict your games here. that is if the u.s. is not actively publicly funding the rebels, it is left to the

saudi's who tend to fund the more extremist group. could that be self-defeating on the united states's part? >> we have done a number of things in support of the opposition. you know, going into all the detail of this -- but there is a division of assistance. there is a lot of the humanitarian assistance that is going in there. what we want to do is to make sure that we understand exactly who will be the recipients for any type of aid, whether it be any number of types of things. communications equipment, other kinds of things that they can coordinate activities with. the policy of the u.s. government is very clear. bashar al-assad moscow. what is happening in syria is serious. it really needs to be addressed and so we are very much supportive of the effort by the opposition. >> doesn't matter whose hand or by who's doing he is ousted?

in other words, the secular rebels are now complaining that they do not have the weapons and the firepower that some of these newer and more extreme rebel forces do. >> any night we could look on the video footage and news programs. clearly there is a lot of weaponry in syria. they are washed and weaponry. there are a number of elements in the military that brought the weapons with them. you know, we are concerned about the extremist view and the al qaeda types. i will say that when you look at the syrian opposition as a whole, the overwhelming majority are not for al qaeda. they are syrians who are truly trying to gain control of their lives and the future. that is what we need to be able to do. it is a multipronged effort, both internationally, diplomatically, and also along the borders and working with the a country that is in the area there. the situation is, it is tragic.

what we don't want to do is do anything that would unintentionally affect greater conflict on the country. now, a no-fly zone in the northern part of the country where the rebels are beginning to have the way to the libyans did in the rebels did in eastern libya. but there is a territory beginning to take shape. can you see circumstances in which the west might protect them? >> just like what happened in libya and the situation syria has been evolving in the past number of months, and the united states government, always looking at the situations and what types of scenarios might unfold, accordingly, we look at what time of contingency plans might be available to deal with certain circumstances. you know, rest assured that various options that are being talked about in the press,

sometimes being advocated, these are things that the united states government has been looking at carefully. trying to understand the implications and understand the advantages and disadvantages. the president has kept us busy making sure that we are able to do everything possible that is going to advance the interest of peace and syria and not do anything that is going to contribute to more violence. >> so it is not a complete nonstarter, the idea. in fact, it is on the table? >> i don't recall the president saying that anything was off the table. >> let's move onto cybersecurity. this has been one of the president's top national security objectives, at least legislatively, to get this bill that would have the ability to put in some protections for the nation's critical infrastructure. oil and gas prices, power plants, water supply and so forth. last thursday, the republican

filibuster block the bill. what are the consequences of that? >> welcome the consequences are that we will not have enhanced authority for the u.s. government to deal with what is increasingly serious than a challenge to our nation and infrastructure. the infrastructure. we worked very hard to try to push forward and advance the provisions that were included in the bill that unfortunately did not advance last week. so what are the implications? one of the things that we need to do in the executive branch is to see what we can do to the policies in place. if congress is not going to act on something like this, and the president wants to make sure that we are doing everything possible. i find it incomprehensible that the legislation that we are calling for, the minimum standards on the critical of the

structure, the u.s. government would help develop with private industry, that those men of standards would be followed by those elements of the private sector that have responsibility in infrastructure. honestly, there are a lot of people that came out and misrepresented what was in that bill. but believe me, the critical interest infrastructure in this country is under threat, and the technology, you know, whether it be foreign state or cyberhackers and others -- they are developing advanced technologies and we have to improve our defenses on those issues. president obama has told us to keep at it and to keep pushing and we are going to keep pushing. we are going to keep pushing in the congress and also do what we can under different sources. >> on the scale from a key theoretical ability to actually being attacked and penetrated in terms of infrastructure.

>> when you do a net assessment, you take a look at what the threat is and what the capabilities are. talking about what the vulnerabilities are, the target of an attack and it talks about content. right now, i can tell you with great certainty that the capabilities, the question is of intent. whether or not certain actors are going to operationalize the capability to go against the vulnerability, everyday, not just the critical infrastructure , but we see that, you know, intellectual property rights are just robbed. people's personal identification, it is a system that is in the private sector, and is privately owned and operated. that is the environment in which all of our daily lives are conducted for the government is not trying to go in and regulate what everyone is going to do

there. but clearly the market has not developed in a way that it has developed on its own. of course, it if it did, we would not have the intrusion and the billions of dollars of lawsuits that companies are now writing. but the american people, they're the ones who will be at risk. not just because of personal identification information that is going to be out there, but also the water we drink, the electricity that we depend upon. the hospital that requires that type of support of infrastructure. >> giving an example of a vulnerability. i know that you don't -- you don't want to give us a blueprint of invulnerability. but what is the electricity grid and how is it that industry operates in 2012 that makes it vulnerable to hacking in. and i guess you are saying disabling or crippling them. >> different types of cyberintrusions that we see.

some go in and then it is operationally preparing. you go in just to map it so you understand it. you go into a axel trade certain types of data or you can go in there so you understand it and then you take actions to disrupt or disable and destroy it. >> so what we are seeing is a lot of intrusion and a lot of infiltration. the next step is, again, the disruptive types of accounts. electric grids, water treatment facilities, mass transportation systems, you know, railways and trains and whatever. if those intruders into the system and then can determine how they can interfere in the command control systems of these systems, they can put trains onto the same track. they can bring down electric grids. >> who is the most interested in doing this?

>> bad guys. >> bad guys. >> defined bad guys who would want to cripple the infrastructure? is that other countries? >> when you look up foreign countries and some have tremendous, you know, cybercapabilities some of the most powerful countries in the world. do they want to bring that down in the united states? no. they rely on the united states economy for a number of reasons. there are some foreign actors out there who have the opportunity, i think they would do it in an instant. they don't have the capability of this time. they may have the intent but not the capability. you also have international criminal groups and things to advance your criminal intent by bringing down certain types of, you know, activities or infrastructure. there could be all types of different reasons or different types of people that are doing

this. >> when you say that you were looking at the executive branch and what they can do, what are you talking about? executive order? >> it is a vehicle that could actually direct the agency to do certain things to make sure that the nation is protected. the president's priority is to protect the safety and security of the american people. as well as the prosperity of the american people. we delivered our legislative package to the hill in april or may of last year. 2001. unfortunately, the senate bill went down last week. but we can't wait. so we are doing things that the nsa, fbi and others are working to make sure that we are able to better safeguard our environment and also be able to respond and be resilient. it is one of the approaches, if you take down some part of the

infrastructure, you want to be able to recover very quickly. >> one final question before we get to questions from the audience. what has to do with this investigation that is going on? everyone from mitt romney to some republicans on the hill, they have accused members of the administration of leaking sensitive details for the president's political benefit. they talk about iran and selecting john targets in the president's involvement in that. and the stl is investigating all of that. what do you say in response to that?

>> welcome a couple things. of things. as you point out, there are investigations underway so we have to be mindful and respectful of that. secondly, the president has made it very clear that any leak of classified national security information is something that should be rigorously pursued and prosecuted, if in fact, there was a violation of one's responsibilities in terms of protecting classified information. there have been some devastatingly. i don't want to validate anything that is out there. but it is unconscionable what has gone out. the president has made his displeasure clear to the senior team that for whatever reason, they want to have a better relationship with a reporter or whatever. there are very critical national security matters that require

information so that it doesn't get out and so of so we can keep the american people safe. anybody who has relief in an unauthorized fashion, any of this information should be held to the requirements and if necessary, you know, dealing with the judicial system appropriately. >> so you're saying some of this has been done. >> unfortunately, i think there has been a conflation of people out there who are making facetious and unfounded claims about individuals who have international security secrets. it is easy to get up and point fingers at the white house and say they are doing it for this or that. you know, frankly a lot of those allegations are highly irresponsible. what we need to do is to make sure that we are dealing with this, these issues in a very serious matter, because the united states is at risk. what we want to do is to make sure that we need to be so

transparent as possible with the american people. you mentioned about when there was this instance when there was an ied that al qaeda was trying to put on an aircraft and they came out. it was the subject of investigation that came out. when the operation came to a conclusion from it we have an obligation to tell the american people about what the threats are coming from al qaeda. it is mixing apples and oranges. we need to make sure that leaks of classified information need to be rigorously pursued and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. at the same time, that should not intimidate us from talking to people here. president obama feels very strongly that government has responsibility to engage with the american people as well as the community. i have said things about our terrorism program. in terms of what we do and how we are trying to do it in consistency with the law, ethics and values of the people.

i will be mindful of national security matters and not to reveal things that will compromise that. sometimes there is tension. >> so we are going to questions. let's start here. >> i was going to take the question back to yemen. you mentioned that yemen is one of the poorest countries in the world. it is also one of the most insecure areas in the world, and it will be increasingly insecure both because of the enormous use of water and because of the climate change. you did not mention anything that we are doing about this to assist or direct.com that, and i wondered if you could comment a little bit on what is a significant issue in that poor country? >> i think i did mention one or

two times about specific projects that we have underway. it is part of our economic development program to look at ways that water can become more available. as you pointed out, the water tables are being depleted in yemen rapidly. you have a population that is growing exponentially. it is one of the highest population rates in the world. hamas is about 7000 or so. it is one of the most water consuming areas in the world. to continue cultivation of the crop. there are a number of things, and we have talked to the yemenis and the saudi's and looking at the gcc for this as well. it is not a question of just building along the coast. it is also a question of trying to develop communities along the coast that have an opportunity to take advantage of water that is available in certain parts of the country. the population of yemen, it is concentrated overwhelmingly and some densely populated areas. water development and projects

that are going to allow the yemenis to address their longer-term requirements is absolutely essential. we would like to be able to work with the world bank so that we can, in fact, have some project dates that are going to address the infrastructural deficiencies that exist within yemen. we need to make sure that there is not going to be a waste of the water that is available. there are greater efficiencies that can be put into the system, taking advantage of water that is there. there are similar types of issues, but the population is not as, you know, concentrated in the urban centers without the availability of the water. the way to address the water problem, some of it is going to be developing communities in different areas and we move away from those urban centers and also for the accommodation of what types of projects we will be able to generate with more

water that exist in the water table, but not that that is available right now. >> right here. >> my name is christopher swift and i'm a fellow at the university of virginia center for national security and law. in late may and early june, i was in yemen doing field research on al qaeda's relationship with the indigenous tribal structu there. i am also signatory to the atlantic council letter to president obama. i think your assessment is correct. i have seen a lot of progress on the ground and i think the administration should be commended for it, especially for the fact there is a national dialogue. i think there are significant improvements in the security intuition in the south, certainly it is better in the south than when i was an eight a month and a half ago. i have some concerns about implementation on indigenous basis, particularly with respect to the nexus between security on

the one hand and development on the other. it is clear to me from the tribal leaders that i interviewed from 14 of yemen's 21 provinces that economic desperation is the primary driver of al qaeda recruiting in the country. it is also pretty clear to me that some of these regions are so remote a desperate that it is very hard for the yemeni government, let alone our security apparatus to get out to some of these places. concern i have is that we know who credible local implementors are, in terms of development and security, how do we do this due diligence and who is doing this going forward? >> the point is that we have a lot of challenges ahead in terms of addressing the multiple needs of the yemeni people and in the different parts of the country, many that are remote and distant and removed from the yemeni government. many which operate under cover politics and relationships. you are absolutely right. one of the complaints of the former government is appointing

his own people from the north to preside and be in government positions in the south. i think that president clinton is trying to do, he actually is a prisoner. he is from that area. he knew the people in that area. they're going to have to be in it. matter of time, so that is money and assistance slows down, it will slow down at the right content right basis. corruption has been rampant for years. president hadi is trying to address that. he was elected at the end of february. we are talking about an amazingly short. matter of time. there have been complaints as result of the yemeni forces, we don't have the policeman coming in or the regeneration of the communities and whatever else. that is difficult to do, you know, even in the united states. look at what katrina and how

long it took for that. the networks are not there, the instruments of interaction with local communities, you know, they have been interrupted significantly as a result of what aqap has done. they have wreaked havoc in the area. you are absolutely right. what we need to do is to make sure that what is pumped in at the top, whether it be the united states or others, go through the people and the mechanisms that will give you confidence to derive the benefits from it. this will take a while. that is why we are counting on president hadi to do as much as he can. but two years from now, we are still going to be facing some enormous hurdles. yemen is one of the most unfortunate backward parts of the world. it is beautiful. you fly over any cds communities that are the same as they were 500 or even 1000 years ago, except for the pickup truck and satellite or whatever. trying to have a countrywide system where you can actually connect the government of the

people, in a sustained way, it is really tough. >> if i may, just gently asked to keep the questions short because we just don't have a lot of time. that is an excellent question. >> thank you. i very much appreciated what has gotten the most attention, putting the program into this broad context, it is very helpful. but the reason the tone program gets much attention is that the lethal force and to get people's attention. i would like to understand little bit more about the framework in which we are operating. this is one of the concerns that a lot of americans have, think about that program. you know what you have described this internal conflict that we are trying to assist yemenis with and driving out aqap.

the u.s. has a strong interest in making sure that our use of lethal force is grounded in the rule block. are we grounding that in a concept of being a party to an internal conflict in yemen? and if not, what is the legal basis for the use of lethal force their? >> the use of lethal force should always get attention whenever it is used by the u.s. government or anywhere. in terms of the basis for the use of lethal force, the authorization of the use of military force in afghanistan, provided the basis for the u.s. government, u.s. military to take action against al qaeda because it presents problems with afghanistan and other affiliated forces. the aqap is one of the most active al qaeda franchises that have been alive.

they are determined to cause terror. when we have aided yemeni government, an insurgency that exist on the ground there, we are not involved in working with the yemeni government in terms of direct action or legal action is part of that insurgency. what i think has been made clear is that there are individuals within al qaeda but are determined to kill americans, whether it be in the u.s. when porting yemen or other parts of the world. we go to great extents to try to for the tax and we very much hope we do it, short of the use of any type of direct action or lethal force, either by partners or by concert, when we don't have those opportunities to prevent these individuals from carrying out these attacks, are only course is to take legal action in concert with partners and provide our partners assistance in that regard or do things with them that we will mitigate that, we do it. but it presents a terrorist

threat to u.s. persons and property is. the aqap is a very interesting organization. interesting is an overused term, but you look at al qaeda. a combination of arabs and pakistanis. mainly arabs that are there. if one body that is using that as a springboard to carry out attacks. it is mainly but not solely composed of yemenis. a lot of these yemenis are not determined, you know, only to tell you attacks against americans, wherever they may be. a lot of them are trying to gain ground and they actually put up their flags. they are controlling a terrorist organization and upset the government and senate. we are trying to help yemenis, you know, for that insurgency and push it back.

because that is counter to our interests and counter to the interests as a whole. where we get involved in counterterrorism fund is to mitigate the terrorist threats and al qaeda has some very diabolical, innovative, creative and determined murderers that have gone to great lengths to try to find ways to put ied's in printers and put them on aircraft, do things against embassy there on almost a daily basis. we are not going to sit by and let our fellow americans be killed. if the only way that we can prevent that from taking place is to take direct action against them, we will do so. >> this gentleman right here and then over there. >> thank you so much. what is your view that the

muslim brotherhood has deeply penetrated the u.s. government? >> i would refer you to the members of congress that made that remark. i have no idea of what it is that they are making up and i am not even going to try to divine what it is. [laughter] >> i really can't address that. >> kim dozier, ap. i wanted to give you a chance to give us a report card on al qaeda at large. how is al qaeda in the arabian peninsula doing over the last six months. you mentioned that you disrupted their recruiting arbitrations. can you give us more specifics in a larger picture? >> you know, i will talk about it overall. another is a lot of attention paid to when there is some type of ordinance that could be dropped by somebody. that is what gets the focus.

on a daily basis, there are activities underway by the u.s. government and the yemeni government and others that is uncovering, disrupting, thwarting these terrorist activities and plans. you know that there are different phases within an operation. identifying the operatives, materials, and whatever else. so there is a continuum there and regularly, we and the yemenis within yemen are disrupting things that are taking place. what is really concerning is when they get to the end of the continuum and given the execution window and they are ready for the ied into the aircraft rent on a regular basis, i think in yemen, there are two things that have been going in positive directions. the first is that since president hadi has assumed the presidency, there is a new determination and consistency in

terms of what the government is doing on counterterrorism fund. our ability to work with them in the intelligence security and law enforcement, military, that has decreased significantly. secondly, thankfully the yemeni military has been able to reverse the gains in the momentum of the apa queue. they have dislodged a number of members of the aqap unit. when we talk about them, they are talking about how many people are there. is that several hundred or several thousand? and is probably both because there are several hundred hard-core committed, fighters, and then there are a lot of part-time tribal fighters that will join them because they are in the area. but i do think that psychologically as well as just geographically, there have been some gains made over the last several months by the forces been able to demonstrate that they can push back. the yemenis have to build behind it. it is a clear hold and that is

what they're trying to do. looking out over all, they have been degraded significantly in terms of the number of operative leaders, others that have been taken off the battlefield. we will continue to mean that that pressure should be there, just because they are significantly degraded and have been badly damaged and bloody, that doesn't mean that they still don't pack a lethal punch. because if they can get operatives trained and out and directed, we know what they did on 9/11. still, there are a lot of individuals who are attracted by the al qaeda propaganda that want to carry out these attacks. we have degraded that, but i am concerned about the growth of the franchises. you look in iraq in terms of the attacks that have taken place there in the situation and how al qaeda is trying to take advantage of it. and you look in africa and across africa you have a lot of

areas. taking advantage of that expanse of territory. the situation in somalia with the political turmoil, there are areas that some of the troubles and others, that you know, present a continuing stress. right now, a lot of the al qaeda elements pose a regional threat, but there is a concern that they could use -- in fact, the growth looks to the north and even beyond. unfortunately, al qaeda, you know, has not gone away. and i know sometimes we sometimes look at the heart of al qaeda in the process. but those are continuing to grow. first and foremost, we have to look at our partners. no matter how many predators or drones you have up there, we are trying to give space to the

country to be able to take these situations upon themselves and be able to talk about the political party. >> we have a couple of minutes left. when we take two questions. keep them very short and combine your answer. >> [inaudible question] >> when i think about that, think about that guys come in terror organizations, bad guys and hackers. what about collaboration among those that i. >> thank you. we could pass the microphone over and you can ask your question. >> i would like to direct your attention to nigeria. and see what your assessment is a book or her own. is that an existential threat to

the state and how are we working with nigeria on a? >> those are two very big questions to answer in two minutes. >> in terms of collaboration among groups, one thing i would point to is that there are a lot of individuals who have been a part of different types of intelligence and security agencies abroad who have developed and refined capabilities and why they were in those professional spots. sometimes the individuals will retire or move on to other pastures. sometimes they set up their own legitimate efforts and sometimes the legitimate. sometimes they maintain relationships with their previous employers and the government. what we are seeing in different places in asia, that there are a number of activities that are emanating from asia that sometimes it is very hard to distinguish whether this is coming from a state sponsor

order a terrorist organization working on behalf of the state sponsor or an organized similar group or a business that is trying to advance its commercial interests or whatever. we are seeing more and more of the common features and the dna that is flowing downstream. frequently when it is acquired in the government. you have a long and very interestingly created private security program. but i think that we have to be mindful that our relationships are there out of the pedigree or how they develop the skills or because, you know, different types of organizations have common cause. volker braun is a very serious concern that we have with the nigerian government. in nigeria you have the domestic

dynamics that are underway in terms of north and south and boca grande and sanaa has been the domestic phenomenon. when it talks about what constitutes terrorism -- national terrorism -- just like aqap has an insurgency against the yemeni government, boca hair on could be considered against the nigerian government. as well as the offshoot. they have a far end up progress in their sights. they continue to go after them. the government throughout has learned that these organizations have the potential to expand at a rapid pace. ..

that has a domestic political agenda, but also was said by a number of underlying conditions that need to be accosted discrimination or perceived inequities, they are able to recruit, the teenagers in africa are attracted and pulled into organizations. 10 or $20, you know, it's something to attract a person to

sign on with a terrorist organization. in 15, 16 years old don't know any better. we really have to tackle again, the country as a whole, the problems that exist because the terrorist groups are just taking advantage of it. i will say president obama, even though he has agreed to an authorized actions we take to keep american people safe, he drives home to west that these are temporary measures. we need to make sure we are able to address those conditions, those factors that are contributing to these terrorist organizations from being able to exploit conditions that exist. so what they're talking about somalia, yemen or nigeria, there's a broader set of issues that needs to be tackled in these countries develop institutions that people can accomplish. so judicial reform, legal

reform, rooting out corruption, these are all part of a broader counterterrorism, broader security effort that president perceives. >> sean brennan, brighter on counterterrorism, thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> we are selling george washington's personal copy of the act of congress. we will start the bidding at $1,300,000. 1,300,000. 600,001,000,000 --

>> from america artifacts, the auction of george washington's 106 paychecks of congress. insiders come along with the constitution they drafted the bill of rights. 1789 book includes the own handwritten notes. also this weekend, more from the contenders. key political figures to change political history. >> as it has been said, in the worst of times, a great people must do the best of things and let us do it. >> i had no idea about the experiences of people who were essentially my predecessor there's in berlin. despite all the time, but it

would have been like to have been a correspondent in the 20s and 30s and how would you have operated, which we do have noticed or not notice, much less how would you have acted? >> former federal prosecutor, andrew mccarthy accused admit being a pattern or for a muslim organization whose founder had provided funding. his interest in aberdeen was motivated by congresswoman, michele bachmann and others of working for agencies. john boehner, arizona senator and others have rejected the allegations. >> good morning, ladies and

gentlemen. welcome to a briefing by a man who i frankly can't find enough superlatives to describe. i'm going to give it my best shot. my name is frank gaffney, center for security policy and we are really thrilled to be able to welcome to you and through particularly the media a much larger audience, a man who has acquitted himself in any number of capacities for such enchanted as i say, my modest vocabulary fails me. and each are in is a distinguished public servant having served us among other names, a chief assistant u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york, in which capacity he successfully prosecuted an extraordinarily dangerous conspiracy aimed at trying to destroy the world trade center the first time back

in 1993 and hot in its crosshairs a number of other sites, many in the new york area. they resulted in the conviction of the blind shake -- "the blind sheikh" order abdul-rauf men, omar abdel rahman, if insisting on his release. i think andy will speak to that. subsequent to his departure from government, and he has continued with great effect to contribute to the public policy debate and decision process. not least in the area that forms the nexus between, on the one hand, national security and on the other, the law. few people do it better than he. he has become a very valued

adviser to the united states congress. he is a brilliant essayist among other outlets, national online, where he is a regular feature column and also are now p.j. media. he is also the author of numerous best-selling books, many of them dealing very directly with the subject at hand, namely at hand, namely at hand, "willful blindness: a memoir of the jihad", how obama embraces the sharia to peer at a book am proud he contributed mightily to, sharia, threat to america, the volume of what is known as team b. to come in 19 experts in various aspects of national security and foreign policies, many of them with

considerable command of sharia and the islamist threat who put together what i think remains one of the most important to prisoners on the challenge that we face from the muslim brotherhood and other islamist organizations, specifically from a civilization jihad. not least, and he is, as you'll see shortly, aramark was human being, a man who is articulate, thoughtful, rigorous in his analysis. he is an outstanding peachtree, most valued colleague and i'm very proud to say, great friend. we are here today to discuss thanks in no small measure to india's collector works, those of many others who include center for security policy, i'm happy to say, features most

recently an online iraqi owned that we produce called the muslim brotherhood in america, the enemy within available for free at muslim brotherhood at america.com. we have also of course had most recently a five courageous legislators, congresswoman michele bachmann, lee gomer, trent franks joined forces to last a series of questions we hope to begin, namely what is going on with the policies that are being adopted by the obama administration that brings it seems ever more into alignment with the desires, goals of the muslim brotherhood. and to what extent, if at all

are individuals who either are in the government's employee or being used as advisors by the government or as liaisons to the muslim american community contributing to the adoption of such policies? as they say, few people have contributed more to the debate that we need on those and am very pleased to say as a result and part, and his leadership that battle is now being joined, across america we are finding people awakening to a very real problem, not from all muslim spirit i'll be clear about that and i'm sure andy will as well. those who seek to impose on the rest of us in to the extent that this issue as i hope that will prepare forward be more of a focus of national debate and

perhaps a decisive factor in my upcoming election, this conversation may prove to be of historic importance. with that, let me ask you to join me in welcoming andy mccarthy. [laughter] >> thank you so much, frank for those kind words. as somebody has had tk a security clearance and a number of times during a lengthy law enforcement career, i have been baffled by this whole situation. let me ask you to imagine a scenario for a high position and executive branch branch agency, that entails over public policy that is highly classified information and consent to be

interviewed by an fbi agent, background investigation. this is routine. even people consider for low-level positions in the executive branch are subject it to background investigation. it is not because we question their patriotism. it is not because we question the honesty or that they are bad people. it is simply a matter of common sense as well as a good deal of those statutory law and regulation. naturally, as they get hired more important and more sensitive come to background investigations get more detail, probing not only a candidate's background, experience, finances and associations, but those of the candidates close family members. one matter of particular importance is to foreign countries, organizations, persons and movements. there is an entire section devoted to these concerns and

form 86, anybody looking for clearance and the government has to fill out and be investigated on. let's say a candidate truthfully completes the form. what do you suppose the agent is thinking as he flips through the form and ask some follow-up questions to get the following story from the candidate? i have worked for a dozen years at an institute that was founded by an influential saudi who is intimately involved in the financing of terrorism. are you just speculating? speculating, no. pc, the saudi guys started an ostensible charity that the united states government has designated as a terrorist organization. it is designated as a terrorist because it was cg hobbyist network. as a matter of fact, one of the

men the saudi guy rotting to help them ran the specially designated terrorist organization was so close to osama bin laden, he actually helped him start the al qaeda network. the jet figures come you got to be kidding me. i guess you didn't know who the saudi guy was hunting al qaeda, right? arcana dancers, well, as a matter of fact, we overlapped for seven years at the institute of arts at. remember he told you, he's the one who started it and i eventually worked there for 12 years. it turns out he stayed involved for decades. it was his baby. he gave the institution its mission and vision. he was still there advising, hoping to take shape after my first seven years working there. then he took them off the map. after that the same time in the civil soup out of it terms of the 9/11 attack.

dh and of course this time. all he can think to ask is, why did you leave the institute and our candidate response, i got offered a full-time position at the state department helping the secretary of state make american foreign policy. now, i must say i wish that was a far-fetched story. to back up for a second, let me first thank you all for being here and thank frank again for those kind words. i came to washington at his suggestion that the suggestion of my other friends at the center for foreign policy because as frank mentioned, i've been writing writing about this issue, the muslim brotherhood for a number of years and for the past couple of weeks and the particular thing that brings is here together today, the fact that five members of congress had the temerity to notice that there seems to be an infiltration of muslim brotherhood influence in our

government. i think i was also asked here because i used to work for the justice department as frank also mentioned. is there for about 25 years. at first i was at the u.s. marshals service says deputy marshal in the witness protection program and was a prosecutor for almost 20 years as frank also mentioned. and i handled or supervised a number of national security investigations, which generally means terrorism cases always involving a tax plodded by violent jihad is. i was also involved in a number of investigations that involved national or international organized crime groups, which were often violent in nature. so based on that experience, i guess that was the main reason to come down and talk about this day. but i have to confess that i think the controversy here is baffling. i don't understand why more people in washington, from both parties have not rallied in

support of congresswoman thought man, congressman gomer, franks, westmoreland and rooney. at a time when government policies radically harmonized with the agenda of the muslim brotherhood, meaning policy has shift in the direction of about enemies of the united states, what ought to shot people is that there's any controversy whatsoever over what i think is really a matter of common sense. the five house members are simply asking these are general and pertinent government agencies conduct internal inquiries and report back to congress about potential islamist influences that this agent is. let me be clear. i mentioned islamist influences and i want to be clear about what i am saying and what i am not saying. i purposely used the term islamist. i did not say muslim. i don't know how many muslims

work in the u.s. government, but i feel pretty safe saying there are probably thousands. as a federal prosecutor on terrorism cases, i had the privilege of serving with many of them. they were picchu roddick, american muslims, a number not americans, but for people who had embraced america and the west. without those people, we could not have infiltrated the jihads networks in new york in the 1990s. without their help, we could not have got the evidence we collected. we could not have lifted into a compelling narrative. it is worth underscoring a pro-american serve honorably in our government and military, intelligence services and in our major cetaceans. we are lucky to have them because they've embraced the culture of individual liberty that is the beating heart of western civilization. they have accepted the premise of our society that everyone has

the right to freedom of conscience, and equality before the law. they've accepted foundational principle that people are at liberty to make law for themselves irrespective of the rules of any of the system are ideology. the concert is on spiritual elements as a matter of private conscience, not send a mandatory as a framework for society. those muslims are not islamists. when we talk about the influence of islamists, we are referring to muslims who are beholden to islamic supremacists and peer to islamic supremacists and is an ideology, not a religion. it is a totalitarian social system that would govern every aspect of life down to the granular level. economic, financial, social, political, military, dietary, matters of crime and punishment, even to matters of paging. that is the sharia system.

as interpreted by many of islam's most influential thinkers and when i'm going to refer to as a classical sharia, that is the version subscribe to the organizations like the muslim brotherhood in academics at the faculty of ancient al-azhar university in cairo. classical sharia rejects basic as symbols of constitutional republicanism. in fact, it rejects first and foremost foundational premise that people are freer to determine their own destiny and was regardless of what sharia holds. it's the goal of all islamists to impose sharia and that's why you suggest there is no such thing as the moderate islamists. if you want to replace the american constitutional system and western civilization but the

middle east, you are not a moderate, however grateful we may be venturing out looking to blow up the bridge in order to impose your desired. whether they are violent or nonviolent, whether they were incrementally towards their goal or import speed, the mission of islamists as always and everywhere to impose sharia. and islamist ideology, sharia is deemed to be the necessary precondition for islam icing the society. and what islamists believe these a year under a divine injunction to do just that. when i talk about islamists and islamist influences, that's a talking about. it is essential to understand that islamic supremacists and is not a fringe ideology and with due respect to the trending bipartisan diagnosis that has become so popular here in washington, islamic supremacists and in the extreme forms of behavior that it inspires are

not associated problem. we like to portray the legal threat against us as violent extremists, the violent extremism does not combust spontaneously. it is caused by islamic supremacist ideology. violent extremism as well as nonviolent extremists and while the facts, they are not causes. they are not irrational amonte. there is a logic to them, i should say an ideologic. this ideology is based on a classical interpretation of islam that has a rich history. we found with it ranked among the people we are trying to persuade we pretend that's not the case. islamic supremacists and has been developed over centuries by many of islam's most respected thinkers come at anchor is better understood as jurors than clerks because their specialty is sharia, which is a societal system again, not just a set of

religious consequences. islamic supremacists and is the dynamic ideology of the middle east at this moment in history. there've been times when it has been dormant and when its worst tendencies of seven cavender suppressed by law, cultural pressures or by force. but at this historic moment, islamic supremacists and is once again in its ascendancy. that's a big problem for us. islamic supremacists mean us great harm. we are understandably preoccupied by the fact that violent jihad is our seeking a mother lives. but we should not let the immediacy and horror of that rat the fact that the islamist movement is taking aim at our way of life. the movement intellectual leaders the muslim brotherhood. the brotherhood is not a virtually secular umbrella organization. it is not moderate. it is the vanguard of a

ground-up revolutionary ideological mass movement. it is sophisticated, patient and determined. but i spent almost 90 years building its reserves and biding its time. increasingly over the last century, over the last half-century patient say, efforts of the muslim brotherhood have been popularly read particularly from saudi arabia. the saudi site fundamentalists interpret called the hobbit sons, a close cousin of the brotherhood's interpretation causalities and period for our purposes, the two extremes merge into the supremacist ideology that the list today. the threat is very real, very aggressive and much broader than terrorism and that is because the underlying thread on terrorism, but the rationale for

terrorism, which is the gradual imposition of classical sharia by both violent and nonviolent. we hear a lot of chatter today separate in the two, trying to separate violent and nonviolent jihads, but they're never really mutually exclusive. the nonviolent jihads is called.walk, and the aggressive proselytism. galois is leveraged by the threat of violence. the intimidation is the next the nonviolent jihads so effective. it is what allows islamist organizations to exercise such outside influence on our policymaking, considering muslims in america barely register about 1% of our population. not long ago, as frank mentioned, i read a book called the grand jihads. the title is not something i came up with. it was drawn on a good internal muslim rather had seized at the

fbi by top operative in virginia. it was dated 1991 and it was called the explanatory memorandum. in it, leading brothers station in the united states explain to corporate leadership of the brothers saw their mission. civilization jihad they called it and then they elaborated. let me read from what the memo said. the avon, that is arabic for the muslim brotherhood, and if one must understand their work in america is a kind of grand jihads in eliminating and destroying the western civilization from within. and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands at the hands of the believer, so what is the lemonade at an god's religion is made victorious over all other religions. see, when islamists speak among themselves, especially when they don't expect that we'll ever see or hear what they're talking about, they are very clear about

what they're trying to do. they are also very clear about who they are trying to do a bit. the explanatory memo listed 29 different organizations, and many among the most influential islamist organizations in the united states. they identify organizations as they are, says in this grand jihads. and now, the brotherhood is in the midst of a gradual triumph in egypt and the broader middle east and not the brothers to become even more bold. for example in october 2010 on the cusp of the revolt, the brotherhood supreme guiding egypt, a man named mohammed badie recalled against the united states. specifically, he urged his fellow muslims for all his commandment to wage jihad with his money in line so that all his word will reign supreme. applying that injunction, badie

claimed they jihad is the only conclusion against what he called thio american arrogance and tyranny, not negotiation, jihads. badie also took a late note in the united states have been badly wounded by jihads is in iraq and afghanistan. for that he predicted that america, and this is a quote, is now experiencing the beginning of it then and is heading towards its demise. so contrary to the increasingly, what seems at least to me to be the increasingly popular belief in washington, islamist influences are not behind. they are not something to jan over. they are something we need to defend ourselves against. we are talking about a very determined movement that pulls no punches and burying its intent to destroy our country. the most important sharia authority in the world, perl

daycare by dolly, will conquer europe and by the way, you want to remember shake coronaries name. we'll be coming back to them shortly. islamists not only say they will destroy us, they telestrator how they intend to do it, not only by intimidating constant potential violence, but sabotage, their word again, not nine. they will destroy us from within. they intend to insinuate themselves into our major institutions, including the policy bodies within our government. they intend to compromise inside as well as from outside. where i come from, when serious competition threatening people tell you what they're going to do to you and how they're going to do it, that is not something to be ignored. it's something we need to take very seriously.

redeye. the main way i think we should take it seriously when it comes to it government is to place our agencies that they are not penetrated by pernicious influences. this is that these five members of congress have tried to do. what is shocking and demoralizing, but to outrage the american people is that five of them seem to be standing alone. to be clear, the five members have not made accusations of criminal law and to those on guilt by association are absurd and mixing apples and oranges. our bedrock principle against guilt by association has to do with criminal prosecution we do not take away liberty just

because of who their friends are or what their associates have done, but guilt by association has nothing to do with it as for high public office. high public office is a privilege, not a right. access to classified information is a privilege, not a right. you need not have done anything wrong to be deemed unfit for these privileges. it is not a question of your patriotism. it's been a or trustworthiness. it's about whether you would be burdened by such obvious conflicts of interest that she would be tempted to act on this venture is rather than in the best interest of the united states. it is about whether the united states people will have interests rather than not at diaster favor or intimidation. it's about whether there was a reasonable chance that you could be compromised, not about whether you have been compromised. to be more concrete about it,

when i was a prosecutor, the justice department would number in a million years have let me handle an investigation that involved members of my family or their friends. that is not because they didn't trust me. it is because it would've been inappropriate. when government acts, he needs to avoid appearance of impropriety. the legitimacy of government action depends on the public integrity of government action. my doj bosses would make me sit out a case because they thought they do something wrong. they would make me sit out a case because the public might believe i was at the non-improper motives. the anxiety about improper motives is a commonplace of replacing government. nothing sends the press and public into a tizzy quite like the thought that government officials are letting lobbyists weighing in on the formulation of policy. we have rules against former government employees lobbying their old agencies. we have rules against representing both sides of the

case. it is expected government officials will recuse themselves from participating ambitions above their friends or relatives in armor clients. those rules flow from human nature. they are not an indictment of the trustworthiness or patriotism of the people have to be involved. people who work in government, especially if they need security clearance says expect not only to have their own background scott, they expect that to happen with respect to the backgrounds of their family members and close associates as well. when fbi agents asked this routine questions, they are not just going through the motions. it disturbing facts develop in the background check of a family member, that can be enough by itself to disqualify a candidate for his position or the position that he seeks. that can be enough for us to try rational conclusion that the public would be better served by having somebody who is not conflicted though the position.

if the fbi had asked me about my mother's background and i responded by tearing what little hair i have left out and saying how could you question my patriotism, that wouldn't have just been a good reason to deny me a security clearance. that would've been a good reason stomata find another line of work. i must tell you, having worked in government for a long time, that is the deepest of government about security clearance. without his background, and i appreciate you bearing with me for that long background, let me speak to the specific circumstances of hauled aberdeen, did -- abedin. it is worth stressing the five members of congress sent five different letters asking effect or strangle a type different industries to conduct an report back to congress. ms. abedin was far from the only government official whose was raised in she's got the most

attention. for our purposes today, that is fine because her situation dramatically shows, i think how badly out of kilter things have become. we have heard all the caliber wally and naturally my personal favorite, mccarthy has some. last night to think about that. first, islamic phobia is a term manufactured by the muslim rather had precisely by browbeating into silence about the kid to do some threat posed by islamic supremacist on. today, there is no worse than meant to be called a bigot, even if the charge is utterly and see. it is intimidating. it's intended to paralyze people into silence when it is their duty to speak up. i'm at work spirit that why 13 americans, some of our best and bravest were killed in the g hottest atrocity of fort hood. it's also at the governed rather dismiss as a place of workplace

violence than deal with the ideology that caused it. duty is calling us now judi has to be done even if the grievance industry grieves in overdrive. as of mccarthyism, the truth is all the demagoguery here has been on the other side. contrary to the claims that congress has raised a senator mccain put it, unspecified and unsubstantiated concerns, they've actually posited very disturbing factual matters that are quite specific and quite substantial. rather than addresses factual matters, matters that include connections to muslim brotherhood luminaries, but to an al qaeda financier, the response of the obama administration, congressional democrats an echo chamber and the republican establishment has been to attack and smear the messenger. having now spent a good deal of time weighing the competing

claims, i am compelled to say that when it comes to ms. abedin's background, the five house members have actually understated the case. the letter to the state department's state department inspector general stated that ms. abedin, this is a quote, has three family members, late father, mother connect it to the brotherhood. -- connected to muslim brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. so they concentrated on the family members. it turns out, however, that huma abedin herself is directly connected to mohamed morsi abdullah omar naseef come a figure involved in the financing of al qaeda. ms. abedin worked at the institute for muslim affairs as an assistant editor of external. it was funded dynasties, who remained at active, overlapping for at least seven years with

ms. abedin. also secretary-general of the world league in saudi arabia, perhaps the most significant muslim brotherhood organization in the world. as part of the muslim world league, he found it to ruby that trust, which is probably doesn't need to under american law that is to say before you even start program the alarming brotherhood ties of ms. abedin's numbers, she could be qualified from any position requiring high security clearance based on her own personal, long-standing connection to naseef. a little more background. at the institute for muslim affairs, ms. abedin was the editor of the journal of muslim minority affairs. the journal promotes the

fundamental version of sharia championed by the muslim brotherhood by abdullah omar naseef and omar abdel rahman. ms. aberdeen was editor of the journal. the journal but as the main product of the institute. ms. abedin held the position of assistant editor from 1996 from 2008, from the time she began working at the click of white house until the time before she took her current position with mrs. clinton, secretary clinton asked chief of staff to secretary of state. the institute was challenged founded by naseef in the late 70s. he is a hugely influential saudi by vice president king abdullah in saudi arabia.

naseef was iodine, the late father. mr. abedin move from kalamazoo, michigan. was about to at the time. her mother, dr. salle of map mode abedin up as an academic and word take the journal of her when her father died in 1993. she remains its editor to this day. the brother, hasan, another academic is an associate editor at the journal. not long after the journal started, naseef became the secretary-general of the muslim world league. as the "washington post" has noted, the muslim world league was launched by the muslim brotherhood with the financial background of the saudi royal background.

it's often referred to as a charity, but really a global population enterprise, the brotherhood's anti-western brand of islamist ideology, very much including the united states. in the brotherhood circles. in fact, one of the founders was cited from the don, the founder of the muslim brotherhood. the muslim world league as part of the foundation of the grand jihad, with the brotherhood calls civilization jihad. nevertheless, the muslim world league also has a long history of deep involvement in violent jihad as well. it was under the auspices of the world league in 1998 world league in 1998 world league in

1998 to world league in 1998 to direct, naseef selected not just a member of al qaeda, he was so close in fact that he was one of the people who formed al qaeda with bin laden. according to bin laden himself, he was one of al qaeda's three top finance sources. consequently after 9/11, naseef would be that trust was a foreign terrorist organization, and the international islamic relief organization, which were two other saudi charities that were sprung out of the muslim world league. throughout the time that he ran the muslim world league and the repeated trust, naseef kept his hand in for muslim minorities affairs. in fact, he continued to be

listed as a member of the advisory editorial board until 2003. we might hazard to guess as to why his name suddenly disappeared after so many decades. naseef's involvement in funding al qaeda was so notorious that in 2004, he was named as a defendant in the civil case brought by the dems of the 9/11 atrocity. in 2010 come a federal court dropped him out of the suit, not because he was uninvolved, but the judge reasoned an american court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. so to summarize, ms. abedin had a lengthy affiliation with an institute founded by a top figure at the nexus between saudi terror funding, ideology at all qaeda's jihads against the united states. even if the only pertinent information we had was this personal tie to naseef, and i would be extraordinarily

disturbing. as the five house numbers have pointed out, there is much more. ms. abedin's parents were recruited by naseef to have at the institute. they had an extremely close relationship with him for over four decades. besides being the editor of the journal, since her husband died in 1993, ms. abedin's mother, doc very salle of mahmoud abbas have one served as a mother of the muslim world league. she also directed an organization called the international islamic committee for women and child. this committee has been listed as the muslim world league organization. a top adviser to dr. bach this committee is to shake use of kara dowie. he about what others thought described numbers are actually the authors of the committee's charter. as i mentioned earlier, shake

his assure a. he is issued fatwa supporting suicide bombing against israel and against american military and support personnel serving in iraq. dr. mark mood abedin's describes itself as part of an organization called the international islamic council for release. i know i'm throwing a lot of organizational names at you. as i understand the materials handed out, there is a timeline and also a couple of charts, which lay up with these organizations are. as i said, the committee i described is part of this islamic council for a dawa. but the council are yet another group, an umbrella organization

run by sheik aradawi. it runs violent jihad, a designated terrorist organization under american law. moreover, the international for dawa is in israel because of his support for hamas. organizations aside, there is much that could be sad about dr. abedin, huma abedin's work at the various brotherhood affiliates she's been attached to. the overarching point does this, she is an ardent champion of classical sharia law. her company's website, for example, is called to the repeal of mubarak egyptians lies that being female mutilation, child marriage and marital trantwo, all of those i support in

classical sharia law and she supports prohibition of them. furthermore, security policy has detailed that dr. dr. saleh mahmoud at abedin price-to-book that appears to have been written by a sister of abdullah bomar naseef. it extensively cites the brotherhood's leading theorist after the death of its founder, hassan al-banna. executed by the egyptian government in 1966 in his writings continue to influence she hottest terrorist organizations, including al qaeda. women in islam say they enslave one man and sharia is a women's only escape here the book revised sharia justification to

such practice as the following, female mutilation, stoning and lashing as punishment for adultery, participation of women in violent jihads, prohibiting social interaction between the sexes, requiring women to be veiled, restrict trade and free speech to what benefits islam, forbidding women to abstain from on demand from there has been, requiring women to bar entry to any person into their home at last there has-beens have granted permission and forbidding the death penalty in cases of apostasy and that is because sharia prescribes the death penalty for anyone who apostates is from islam. interestingly, about a year ago, a year before he took to the floor of the unid states senate to attack his house colleagues are raising question about his abedin in others, senator john mccain gave an

interview tuesday goal in which pronounced himself unalterably opposed to any role for the muslim brotherhood and post-mubarak egypt. when the magazine asked senator mccain when his main objection was to the brotherhood, he said it was the brotherhood's promotion of sharia, which he observed, and this is a quote, anti-democratic at least as far as women are concerned. one last point on ms. abedin's family members. as i mentioned earlier, her brother, hasan abedin is affiliated with the journal of muslim minority affairs as an associate editor. in addition, he was a fellow at an islamic academic institute in great britain, the oxford center for islamic studies. during that time, the oxford center board members included abdullah omar naseef and shake

our dowie. let me mention a few more enclosing. in the end, our system is mainly about political accountability. i think much more than legal remedies. i'm not accusing anyone of a crime. our national security and foreign policy have taken a dangerous turn. that needs to be a campaign issue regardless of whether they need to make it one. the policymakers should be stress than a prop members of the administration, secretary clinton when it comes to foreign policy. no one i know, least of all me as contending that president obama are president clinton needed huma abedin to develop

sympathy. i would be surprised if ms. abedin does not favor the administration's decision to do with the muslim brotherhood is a friend rather than enemy, but she is not the official responsible for that decision. some of the people highlighted in the letters by the members have very influential decisions about us cause for concern because they have a lot to say about how policy gets shaped and applied. no one is claiming that anyone other than the president is ultimately responsible for industry should policy. it is also true that presidents and cabinet officials get to consult and seek assistance or whoever they want. the old adage that elections have consequences is out here. cabinet nominations and confirmations have consequences, too. if you don't want people with disturbing connections with the muslim brotherhood to have influence on government officials, and then the point to

avoid dean and confirming politicians who are going to put such people in those positions. still, all that said, it is congress' responsibility to scrutinize the policy, especially when the policy choices endanger the nation. let's consider some of those policy choices in the last three and a half years. since 2009, the obama administration has abandoned the prior policy formally with the muslim brotherhood. the state department has not been supportive of the dramatic shift. it has embraced a number of possessions that undermined up american constitutional rights and our alliance with israel. to name a few manifestations of the policy change, the state department has an emissary in a jet to trains operative of the muslim brotherhood and other

organizations and democracy proceedings or actually helping them get elected. the state department announced that the would be satisfied with the election of the muslim brotherhood oriented governments in asia. the state department has collaborated with the organization of the islamic cooperation, a block of government heavily influenced by the brotherhood in seeking to restrict american free-speech rights in deference to sharia prohibitions against examination and negative consideration of islam. the state department has excluded israel, the world's leading target of terrorism from its global counterterrorism come a group that brings the united states together several islamic governments, prominently including its cochaired, turkey. by the way, erred again now finance is a terrorist organization, hamas, the muslim governments branch.

at the florence kicked off, secretary clinton decried various terrorist acts in various terrorist groups, but she did not tension hamas or attacks against israel. transparently, this was in deference to the islamist government chosen to partner with coming to the exclusion of israel. those governments adhere to the muslim brotherhood that hamas is not a terrorist organization and terrorist attacks against israel are not terrorists. the state department and the obama administration waived congressional restrictions in order to transfer about one point i've billion dollars in aid to egypt after the muslim brotherhood to read in the parliamentary election. the state department and obama administration waived congressional restrictions in order to transfer millions of dollars in aid to palestinian territories, notwithstanding that gaza is ruled by hamas,

which again is a designated terrorist organization and palestinian branch. i should not with respect to a designated terrorist organization, it's an american citizen tried to provide material support to mugabe e. guilty about administration recently hosted a can tension each of the newly elected parliament that included not only muslim brotherhood members, but a member of the islamic group. the islamic group is the jihads organization headed by the "the blind sheikh," back in the early 90s, currently serving a life sentence for his leading role in the terrorist plot that not only bombed the world trade center, but planned an even more ambitious campaign of simultaneous attacks on new york city landmarks. like hamas, the islamic group is

a designated terrorist organization to which it is illegal to supply material support. finally, they just completed trip to egypt, secretary clinton pressured the ruling military junta had to hand over power to the newly elected parliament, which is dominated by the muslim brotherhood and the newly elected president, mohamed morsi, an official. secretary clinton later met to extend honor to come to the white house this time there. all of this comes despite the muslim brotherhood's extensive record of hostility towards united states and despite the fact that mohamed morsi in his first public statement after being elected president announced the fact that one of his top priorities was to exert pressure on the united states to force them -- force us to free "the blind sheikh" and transfer him back to egypt.

.. and conduct oversight over executive agencies after all, the peoples' representative have created the agency. it is congress that fund the agencies with taxpayer dollars. what we are paying for dramatically effects our security so congress must exam the policy and expenditures to protect the public interest. under the circumstances, there would be something terribly

wrong if members of congress were not asking questions about islamist influence on the government. and there is something terribly wrong in the fact that these five members of congress are the only ones who seem to have the courage to step up to the plate. thank you very much for your attention. i appreciate it. [applause] sir? [inaudible] thank you very much. my name is bob and i'm a former state prosecutor. i have always been intrigued with the chain of events that lead to the seizure of the explanatory memorandum that you discussed this morning. i have been looking at the of a david that resulted in thish chance of the search warrant for the home virginia. i've noted that the fbi believed that there was a connection to

al qaeda, and that the individuals who were caught on the chesapeake bay bridge prior to the seizure were performing reconnaissance for al qaeda. i have ther. innocent paragraphs of the of affidavit with me. my question is this, should we as citizens not be concerned or angry since 2004, our government has not adequately investigated and prosecuted this connection with al qaeda? >> well, let's -- we don't know they haven't adequately investigated. you know, we have, i think, agents particularly in the on the frontlines that are doing what they can to investigate this pretty they are row lie. let's not forget, we know the enemy of trying to hit us, we have not suffered a reprize 9/11

since it happened. i think you don't want to undersell the energy that our agencies devote to protecting america. they have done a good job it of it i'd say for the last ten or twelve years. that said, the relationship between al qaeda and the muslim brotherhood is interesting. one of the items, i guess, of conventional wisdom that seems to be sewn here, one of the things that makes them moderate are they are less wild and crazy than al qaeda and impose everybody on the fast track. the interesting thing, they have a very touchy sort of relationship. the brotherhood has a good thing going here in the united states. they are not vie lie vent jihad working well for them.

i think they have a made a calculation that jihadist attack in the united states are to be avoided. they're doing forfectly well without them. they don't want the atmosphere of intimidation that results from terrorism attack. they realize that when there are terrorist attacks in the country, there's going to be a significant blowback and they will effect their operations in a negative way. on the other hand, when you're talking about american armed forces or other american presence operating inside islamic countries when al qaeda attacks americans in islamic country, the muslim brotherhood fully supports them. in fct the muslim brotherhood wanted bin laden many times. want things said about him in arab ibic were different than some of the thing we heard in english. it's an interesting connection between the two yes.

>> did you say about -- [inaudible] about the fbi and other -- [inaudible] organizations -- do you want me to repeat? >> yes. >> sandy. the question is can you say something about the purging of the training manuals for fbi and other agencies here to comply with muslim brotherhood requirements? >> that's wrong on just so many levels. first of all, why we're taking advice from organizations that don't mean us well is baffling. the thought -- let's assume for argument's sake what you're hearing is right and outrageous stuff in the training manuals, if these are the people that we're training to protect our country from intelligence, i think they can probably be exposed to stuff and figure out what is wacky and real. if they can't, i don't know why they're being trained for the jobs they're being trained for.

and finally, here's how much i think things have changed in fifteen years. -- after the the way we prosecuted the blind sheik to prove there were injunctions toward violence in the koran. i'm not suggests that's all the koran said. what he said was in there was in there. he would sell those injunctions into his commands to violence. which is what maid them so powerful. what made him powerful. think about the -- outedderly incapeful of doing everything help to -- what was the sour source of influence? it was the fact that he is not a nut which is what they wanted to

the government was saying back in 1993, doctor of islamist juries prudence graduated and a renowned authority on here is rei ya. we prove we have the very influential jurist who uses these command that are threading through the koran and get followers to commit acts of terrorism. for that, the justice department brought us down to washington and gave us, you know, prosecutor of the year whatever it was. and i don't mean to belittle it. we. were honored to get it. flash forward fifteen years later, people who suggested there are commands to violence in the koran, and they are the fuel that ends up in violent extremism on islamism, what we

used to call evidence is a hate crime basically. if they get their way, and the first amendment cutbacks that the organization of the islamic cooperation would like to see, somehow find their way into the law. it would be harder not only to prosecute terrorism cases we but even to talk about. yes? >> mr. mccarthy, wester have non. renew america. it i'm trying to determine. you mentioned during your dissertation here that this should be become an issue. the whole thing should become an issue when the current president presidential campaign. it raises the question whether or not you know of or will support or encourage or actually take the lead in my effort to get to the romney campaign and/or some of the pack organizations that by

advertising in support of the romney campaign. can you give me any indication as to what we look forward to in that regard? >> well, look i -- i think i just did why thought needed to be said, and i have to tell you, shocking as it may seem, i don't think the romney people get up every morning and say, i wonder what andy thinks today. in my experience, it hasn't happened. i'm going keep employing away. i think it's important for the country. >> if you know of any efforts . >> look, i think it's very obviously this is a crucially important issue. let me just explain why i think so other than the obvious. if you have a serious problem, i think we have a serious problem at the very least worth investigating about influence in our country, and when you describe it to people, they think it's hair raising. think think, my god, this is really bad.

well, the people on capitol hill know that better than the file in the country do. we have a situation we have five members of congress who are willing to get up and say something about it, and, you know, remain of them seeming to hold their nose and wish the whole thing would go away. now, that's not only bad in of itself in this one situation, what does it say the next time some information comes up that cries out to the disclosed and investigated? you know, if you're an ambitious politician in congress, and you see what they did to michele bachmann, and the rest of the characters, it's going to be very hard to stand up and do what needs to be done. i think it's vitally important and would be a wonderful thing if governor romney did it. it's vitally important that, you know, we raise holly hell and

people stand up and be counted about this. yes, sir? >> [inaudible] academia. question, the ram dan with the muslim world leak that you mentioned is he related to -- [inaudible] >> his father, yes. >> his great grandfather? >> hassan al-banna who is the founder of the muslim brotherhood and he was married to the daughter. a family tree there. yes, sir? >> thanks. you indiewlg in here he doesn't have any policy role in fact she's sort of a -- you didn't. i said she didn't make policy. i didn't say .

>> okay. >> okay. so in politics she's essentially the body personal a personal aid that helps secretary of state picks out her suit and get her from meeting to meeting. i want you to explain what mechanism she would be using to exert the muslim brotherhood on hillary clinton. >> i don't any evidence to corroborate your version that she's the body person. i know she managed to get mrs. clinton appear at the college her mother founded? egypt. of all the places they could have went to. they go there, that one, by the way, has board members who are involved in terrorism. [inaudible] >> i think she did her share too. -- [inaudible] [laughter] look, somebody says she's not a family member. look, this is not a partisan problem. we're in a partisan setting

right now. look, i was very critical of the bush administration when i think they bent over backwards and turned the blind eye to things they shouldn't have turned the blind eye to. i think the obama administration made it worse. they hardly invented the problem. and, you know, i don't know what to say about this except that i thought i was clear that i thought it was a real bipartisan feeling. i'm proud of the five people who stood up and were counted and continuing to stand up regardless of the fact they really were put the wringer. there's some 500 other people, you know, either haven't been heard of heard from. when they have been heard from, they said the wrong things. some are republicans and some are democrats. i don't think, you know, stupidity doesn't seem to be a partisan condition.

yeah? [inaudible] >> can you be more specific on the -- what is the danger if like if we open arm to muslim brotherhoods as a country as a leader of the country for the president of egypt? i'm wondering if it's just -- open arms. >> i guess what i don't see it as is peaceful, you know, i think they are committed enemy of the united states. you get that , i mean, i don't it requires a great deal of mind reading. you get the supreme member of the brotherhood coming out in 2010 saying they there going to be vie lieutenant jihad again the united states. you more coming out of the box taking positions that are hostile to our interest. i'm not foolish enough, i hope, to think that you don't have to

deal with your enemies. my point is that you deal with them as enemies. you don't pretended they're your friends. i think it's a much more sensible place to start from. >> right now we are the leader of the country -- [inaudible conversations] i don't like the comparison. i'm probably going to be mad of myself. hitler was a leader of the country. the fact that they're a leader of the country. it doesn't mean they're not our enemy. the muslim brotherhood is our enemy. have to deal with them, that's the facts of life. we'd be children if we didn't think you should have to deal with them. you should deal with them as what they are not what you wish they are. i think it makes us a lot safer or it would makes a lot safer. >> skipping over the hitler part. is it reasonable to look at the way we used to look at communism ultimately they goal was to replace us as well. there's a difference between going to war -- i'm not

advocating war against egypt. understanding people who don't like the way you live. >> i think it makes a lot of sense. we also, we should be honest about what the history communism was. there was, you know, more infiltration than we thought. so, you know, i think that's a very good able gi but let's make it accurate analogy. we are dealing with an ideology. i think in many ways, the soviet/communism in particular was easier for us to deal with. when you inject the element of religion, which you have unfortunately with the islamic supreme schism. it does spiritual elements. it's small amount of what the total ideology is, but, you know, i think has made it because of our respect for religious liberty made it more difficult to grapple with the threat. i think a lot of well-meaning

people have gotten it wrong, but i think it's a good analogy. >> before osama bin laden was killed. you had an interview with kathleen gene lopez saying he outlived his usefulness to the muslim brotherhood. it would be okay for the muslim brotherhood to kill him. do they obama administration killed the them as a favor because he outlived his usefulness. >> i consider it a personal favor to me. i'm grateful. i don't think, i think osama bin laden was a threat to the united states. i don't know, you know, how it impacted the muslim brotherhood. i do think in my ways . >> i'm just wondering. what i said was that he outlived his usefulness in the muslim brotherhood. i think it's true, large i.

>> that therefore it would be okay for the islamist influence for the administration to get rid of him. >> fifteen reasons why it was a good idea to kill bad. that's the one? >> what do you mean? >> knob else made that argument. i've never heard it before. >> i'm a wack job. i don't know what to tell you. >> you can say that. but you made. >> we're in agreement. >> i think osama bin laden outlived his usefulness to the muslim brotherhood. that is hardly a reason why the president of the united states, the commander in chief in a war against al qaeda would authorize an operation to kill bin laden. if it had a residual benefit or whatever impact it had on the muslim brotherhood, that's the impact it had. what my argument is, and i continue to think it's true, is

that president obama has been very tough on violent jihadist. for those who mentioned the partisan issue, back in the 2008 campaign, i argued that obama was completely right and mccain was completely wrong about obama's promise that, you know, if pakistan wouldn't deal with the jihadist in pakistan that he would deal with him and mccain sleeked and said they're our ally. how can you say that? i thought obama it exactly right. it's a good thing for the country that president obama has been tough on violent jihadist. i think it's unfortunate that they botched up the issue of detention that it seems that they sometimes kill in certain circumstance where we should capture and select good intelligence, but that seems to

be sometimes almost to be a quibble because i frankly -- i thought obama was right when he talked about pakistan, but i didn't believe him. so, you know, he proved me wrong. when he got in, he has been very tough on pakistan and yemen and all kinds of different pockets. that's said, being tough on violent jihadist has made it a lot easier for him to have maneuvering room in terms of dealing with the muslim brotherhood. i don't have in front of me, you know, whatever it is you're quoting, but my rex is that was what i was trying to get at. in other words, the fact that he has cracked down aggressively on violent jihadist in my ways more aggressively than president bush did has made it easier to embrace the muslim brotherhood groups without having a lot of

political fallout. >> how does the same-sex marriage fit into the whole islamist agenda thing? >> i'm curious. if the muslim brotherhood wants to impose and the obama administration is sympathetic to that. assume same-sex marriage is going to have fit there. >> i'm not saying obama wants to impose jihad. >> the goal -- is [inaudible] you said the obama administration has islamist sympathy. >> you're too important for me. i apology. i think you don't like the question. i guess, you know, look, there's a fair question in there someplace. it is this, to say that obama has islamic sympathies is not the saying he's an islamist or he wants to impose here is rei ya. what it is saying that -- i'll

make a broader point about the hard left in general, there are many historical instances of leftists and islamists working together. they exist right before our eyes now, and they have gone back more than half a century. that doesn't mean that the two of them agree on everything. they grow on a number of core things. they are both sympathetic to the idea of totalitarian system. it's not the same total yaren system. they disagree on a lot of important things too. they tend to combine with each other when they have a common enemy. but once there isn't an common enemy they fought with each other viciously in history. i don't i have -- i don't see why there's a problem saying obama has islamist sympathies and saying he's not an

islamist. i think it's elementary. if i'm confusing on that . >> yes, sir? >> [inaudible] two comments, mr. mccarthy. one is the comment that the enemy of my enemy my friend from the middle east. the other one if you dig into wick i can leaks you find -- obama's deputies had talked to the germans, they wouldn't take him and so he arranged for a phone that was comprised. so he could take them out. he didn't think he was strong enough and radical enough because bin laden did not want to take certain weapons of mass destruction just yet. he did. can you dig it up? >> okay. from fit and public life. doesn't believe that obama was born in the united states. also he said there's mounting

evidence he may be a muslim. do you agree the claims? >> i don't -- i address those -- as far as the muslim business is concerned, i address it in my book. i don't think -- since i argue most of the time that we should avoid imposing on the united states. i think the president gets benefit as well. there's some evidence that he was at least raised as a muslim when he was in indonesia. there's documentary evidence that corroborates that and other circumstance. as far as i know, the president has never done anything to affirm islam proclaimed self to be a christian. i don't know why we question that. it's islamist ideology where they say once we brand you as a muslim you're a muslim for life. if you try to leave, you're us susceptible or liable to the

death penalty. that's not our way of thinking. so if somebody wants to run a nutty theory that obama is an muslim because at one time he may have been in the childhood raised as one, which i don't know to be true either, then, you know, good for them. i think it's a stupid thing to do. >> you would describe mr. gaffney as running nutty theories? >> no. i would nt. >> you're assuming i'm going accept what you say. >> that's a direct quote. there's mounting evidence that he may still be a muslim. >> i rather see the quote before i say anything. >> if it were true you would say it's a nutty theory. >> i'm not going to play that game. i said what i said. >> and the allegation that he's not born here. did you think it's a credible question? >> is what? >> whether he was born in the united states? >> i think that he could have

done a lot more to take the question off the table. >> you don't think the birth certificate was enough? >> which birth certificate? >> i'm not going do the birth certificate. i'm here to talk about the muslim brotherhood. you have -- we have -- enough. no. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> sir, i just a few -- hi, my name is anna i'm from a newspaper. i'd like a few examples of how the u.s. has trained the muslim brotherhood in democracy procedures that help them become elected. i think you mentioned it earlier. >> there's a guy a state department official who has a name that escapes me at the moment who is the obama administration's point person for, i think, they call it point person for democratic transition. he's given a number of interviews, i think some in the

american press but certainly in the arabic press where he explains that they give democracy classes and the procedures of democracy, which without having him give chapter and verse, what i take that to mean is sort of organizing political campaign, developing, you know, election strategies, developing platforms and alike. this is almost a direct quote. i remember him saying, some days the islamists come, and some days they don't. he is also, by the way, the official who said that the obama administration would be -- i don't want to misquote them. something along the lines of satisfied with the muslim brotherhood victory. okay. that's what i've got on it at the moment. okay.

>> [inaudible] with the investigative project on terrorism. a question for you, center for american progress well connected democratic think tank where they said there's a islam phobia where there's an my organization, the ipt, and yet, some of the people have been making the same charges are groups that are actually much larger than ours like, you know, the american civil liberties union and various other groups that are, you know, very well connected on the political left. what is the best way to answer these kind of charges? >> well, i think as i said before, islam phobia is a fabrication by the muslim brotherhood. it's a strategy. this is a label they've come up

with themselves, and like many of of the strategies, it's clever, and it has worked. it backs people up who are afraid or intimidated by being subjected to that kind of smear. you know, i don't know what to -- advise people other than so you to tune it out and not care about it. i don't care about it. i have trouble identifying with people who do, but i -- i understand the problem. i just -- you know, i just -- i think it's a mistake to think that you need to get into a rational argument with people that are moving a movement not trying to the have a good faith give and take with you. >> yes? >> it's a pleasure being here with you today.

i have a question about some comments that secretary clinton made in last summer. she said the administration would use old fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, basically, to prevent any kind of islam phobia, or, you know, threats of imminent violence. and i wanted to know how much further down the rabbit hole are we going go until there's a change in the tipping point why there's enough knowledge and enough anger, enough proof for us to stop this and kind of at what point can we turn the tables? >> i guess the first thing is i think it's inappropriate for the government to bully people. , i mean, there's a plenty of peer pressure. it's supposed to be a citizen on sister thing. when it gets to be government on citizens. it's a big problem. you know, in my office, which i was very proud to work at for almost twenty years, the rule of

the road was the government spoke when it was ready to charge somebody. before that you were supposed to keep your mouth shut. i'm not pretending that everybody followed the golden rule to the t. every time. they should have. i think it's wrong for government, you know, -- government has lawful procedures in order to repress people who deserve to be repressed as a matter of law. if they haven't violated the law and they are exercising the constitutional rights. the government ought to butt out of it. it's the case with secretary clinton. we had situations where -- remember the the guy down in florida, who was -- burning the koran and that was creating a violent reaction in afghanistan. you know, senator graham and general petraeus had a lot to

say about the guy down in florida who was burning the koran. now, you know, i happen to think that's not a good way to go about registering your dissent. i think there's a lot better ways you can do it. the guy had a right to do it. and, you know, i think what we ought to be more focused on is people who think it's okay to commit mass murder over the burning of a book rather than the burning of the book. so, you know, i think that's wrong. in terms of how far we are going go, you know, i think there's going to be movement on the oic's resolution, which does attempt, and i understand it, the administration has been supportive of this in the process to try to do an end around the first amendment in a way that would enable it to

crack down on commentary about islam. now, i don't want to get riled up about that until i see exactly what they're going to to try to do. some of it may, you you know what they're doing with the oic to keep the temperature down and try to keep good relations, but some may be substantive in theory. i think that's an eye to keep on what happens with the resolution. yes? >> [inaudible] [inaudible] the decision from the islamist. i was wondering, like, what you do to prevent the radicalization from your side or the other side of the islamic because whatever -- inflammatory for . >> well, you'll how do we

prevent them from being radical? yeah. there was some burning a mosque or killing other people because of the . >>. >> you know, i made a living doing this for a long time. when people violate the law, they ought to be prosecuted. and it includes insightment. there's sometimes difficult line between, you know, free speech and insightment to violence. there are legal tests and they do work, and those people ought to be prosecuted aggressively. but i don't think that we should -- i adopt think that we should comprise an iota our lawful first amendment rights because a bunch of lunatics think it's okay to commit mass murder over what in our society would be so

insignificant they're not worth mentions. >> you disagree with the position, whatever the -- says and the action of those radicals there's a connection . >> look, i think there's a difference, you know, i don't think the government has to lead everything. you know, if you have a lunatic some place who wants to burn a koran to call attention to himself. i think that's a time when peer pressure, the real peer pressure, not the government peer pressure, we ought to trust we have a good enough society to dissuade people from doing stupid things. every now and then within that's , that's what the first amendment is about. somebody is going to do something provocative and upsetting, in some ways insensitive to the point of being inhuman and the way our society is and the way i think

we want it to remain we swallow hard and accept it and have the free exchange of points of view that we have. yes, sir? >> i have a -- [inaudible] slightly tricky yes. my name is ron thompson. it's a followup on the spiritual element in islam. and it almost feels indies crete to ask. can i before you continue. what i'm meant. it was impartive smallness. that component when you look at the toll talty of what it -- i hope i didn't suggest that the spiritual elements of the islam were small in the sense of being, you know, something that dismiss. >> okay. i'm inclined to think they are. a little bit to my question aren't good, decent, pallet -- patriot immuslims bad muslims?

how is it possible to be a good muslim and not be in favor of the law? >> there are a wide variety of interpretations of islam and there is a lot of courageous and creative effort that is under way in the islamic community to try to reinterpret the aggressive passages or try to put them in historical context that says that it was then, but it's not for now. >> do you see any success with it? >> there's some success. it there are places like indonesia, indonesia now is i think trending badly at the moment. the practice of islam in indonesia is very different than the practice of islam, generally speaking in saudi arabia. let me tell you something else in my own experience as a prosecutor doing terrorism cases. i think the big divide in the

islamic community is between the rank and file -- and the leadership of the mosque and the community center. when we needed cooperation from the islamic community in conducting investigation. we generally got it. if cave with caveats, most specifically people didn't want it to be known they had cooperated with us. but as long as we should assure them that didn't have to be found out, they were pretty cooperative. and the reason that they were worried about that wasn't always violence. i think there's always part of that when you're dealing with a terrorism investigation. it's the nature of the piece. the thing most concerned about was being ostracized in their community. the reason for that is the people in the community tended

to be american people who happened to be muslim. the leadership in the moisk mosque and the community center were influenced by the muslim brotherhood. very often actually come from overseas, and were preaching a much more fiery version of islam than the people in the community might have felt comfortable with even if they didn't feel comfortable speaking up and objecting. i think it's a complicated situate. first of all, i'm not a muslim. i don't think it's for me to say what is authentic slawfm. if we were talking about something as simple as, you know, these guys say two plus two is four, and these guys are trying to prove that two plus two is really five. i think, yeah, you can say it's a black and white issue and, you know, these people are wrong. as it happens, you know, we're dealing with a community of well over a billion people.

they have many different interpretations of islam. and there are many places where it's practiced in a way that is very benign, and the explosive parts of the scriptture are seam belie irrelevant. it doesn't mean they're not there. we're seeing in indonesia now that, you know, things are going in the wrong direction, and that's worrisome. i'm not -- i don't feel either confident or comfortable telling somebody who, you know, interprets islam in a way that says that i don't need to follow these injunctions and i can regardless of what classical sharia said i can separate my life from civil society. i don't feel comfortable telling that person that you're wrong about islam. >> precisely what i asked, i appreciate your response. >> yep?

>> yes, sir? [inaudible] hi, thank you. i'm curious if you can address some of the criticism some critics about the michele bachmann and the colleagues an letters. they said they should have made it public and michele bachmann posted on the website that doing so the conservative talk radio show to talk about it. in doing so it undermines the legacy of the crime. she would you have preferred to see that. >> i have to confess, i don't know enough about how it got publicized. >> the letters are on the website. >> i know they're on the website now but i don't know that's how they originally got published. i would if they got publicized some other way it would be better to put it on the website to see what nay actually really. i'd be speculates.

>> i believe they were published on the website. i don't know. >> all right. >> you indicated that huma abedin is the assistant editor for the journal of islamic affair. >> journal of muslim minority affairs. >> is that journal available online? >> i don't know. frank probably knows this better than i do. was it online? >> it is online? >> i have seen a number of passages from it online, but i don't know if i got that because somebody put it. franklin said it's online. >> can you talk about a little bit more about the kinds of things that appeared in the public indication? >> there's -- it's, umm, it's very similar, from what i have seen, and realize now it is a journal that goes back to the late 1970s, and i've seen -- i

don't know how representative the sample may be, you know, five or six different editions, maybe. and not -- it was just an article here, an article there. you know, there's some reliance on -- there's a lot of talk about in what i've seen, muslim -- muslim minority communities particularly in the west, which is interesting because it's an issue that's greatly important particularly to to -- has been called, i don't think it's his characterization it's called voluntary appar tide. are par tide. the muslim community muslims move into western countries or countries that are not muslim

countries and get a toe hold in an on clave. the idea would be that more and more move into the onclave and you put pressure on government in order to be allowed to conduct the affairs on the sharia. if the process continues, what you have essentially done is seeded sovereignty from the governing authority of the country to the onclave and the muslim authority. that is one of the big strategies for islamizing europe. and, you know, it's worked frightening well in a number of places. the prime minister of turkey considered a assimilation with the muslim communities assimilate in the west to be a crime against humidity. it's a very big em baretive to

be allowed to first get a physical toe hold in a place, get that to be bigger, and then establish the precedent that the territory is governed by islam law. and when i have seen in the journals, there's been, you know, some stuff about that. >> one last question. >> thank you. would you expect that some point that people within the government might come forward as whistle blowers about the vetting processes? >> if the vet progress excesses involves classified information, i sort of hope they don't because you don't want to right something that is wrong by something that is worse. and that, again, brings us full circle to where we started, the most appropriate way for it to be investigated is for congress

to investigate it. i think the way these five representatives went about it asking for inspectors general at least preliminarily looking into it and reporting back to congress it was a good way to go. an inspector general in an agency -- especially if he or she does the job right, has the capacity to conduct a competent investigation without bumping into the agency's mission left, right, and center. sometimes congress just sort of ham handily decides that, you know, they need to investigate something right now in some executive agency. you can comprise the effectivenesses of the mission. if you go the through the inspector general, you might find out what you want to know and you might do it without breaking too much stuff. anyway. thank you very much. [applause]

>> let me thank mr. mccarthy what i anticipated was going to be an extraordinary drill down on the problem, and i thank all of you for being here. i want to say on your way out, if you didn't get in the pact, there are two important letters that went out congress to specifically how speaker john boehner in the past couple of weeks one 17 prominent figures and the other from andy mccarthy and four influential in the law enforcement community and intelligence. i hope you stay tuned as more of this documentation of very serious problem and the civilization jihad through the sent and andy's work and otherwise. thank you very much. >> tonight on c-span2 w the head of the tsa doeses airline security at the meeting of the airline pilot association.

john talking about u.s. crownt terrorism efforts in yemen. former federal prosecutor andrew mccarthy accuses the state department official as having ties to the muslim brotherhood. >> you're watching c-span2 with politics and puck -- public affairs. key public policy events and every weekend the latest non-fiction authors and books on booktv. you see past programs and get our schedule on our website. you can join in the in on the conversation on social media sites. john was the keynote speaker today at the airline pilot association safety forum. we talked about efforts to prevent terrorist attacks against aviation and stopping explosives before they can get on to airplanes. it's just over an hour. [inaudible conversations] ladies

and gentlemen, please join me in join applause in welcoming captain chuck hogman. [applause] >> air safety forum, our theory for this years forum is everything matters. what does it mean for us? just this, in a system is complex as commercial aviation, no single element can enhance safety on its own. equipment systems and human factors are interrelated in and effect everything else and we must work together to function effectively just as a crew must work together. everything matters. for the next two days, we'll look at some of the those interrelationships and why they matter to the association and the industry at large. we have informative and thought provoking panelists that look at

such issues as the political environment in the u.s., canada, and worldwide. our today's regular a will story structures up to the task of providing safe, e official travel in today's economic environment. we'll be talking about airport wildlife, ground operations, and runway incidents to see how we can make that airport environment safer. many think of flying in terms of cruising a 35,000 feet we know better. experience tells us some of our most challenging work takes place while we're still close on the ground or to. we'll be ask whether passenger and crew member screens and security measures are up to keeping the task of keeping bad people off the airplanes. we'll discuss health issues that are nows can on the crew members who are operate in the unique and demanding environment at high altitudes. no discussion on health and welfare of pie louts would be complete about a discussion on

fatigue and how airlines passenger and cargo alike must adapt to the same science-based approach in scheduling their pilots to promote our never-ending goal of one level of safety. as with many forums in the recent past, we continue to examination the -- in our craft and how to keep the flying skills sharp. and we'll explore the rapidly growing segment of unmanned air ideal systems. we may find ourselves sharing our air space with people on the ground. it rears careful examination of pilots within health, fatigue, automation and security in short, everything matters. sitting an you and presenting before you are some of the world's leading experts on the air safety. take the opportunity networking with other attenkeys. ask question of the panelists and visit the great exhibits and

sponsor. as i tell my passenger, buckle up, unlike the regular passengers your ride is for the next two days. to formally begin the meeting. we honor the united states and canada with the national anthems of the great countries. please rise for the playing of "oh canada" and the playing of the" star spangled banner "♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ thank you, please be celted. it's my great pleasure to introdrug abuse the president of

the airline piloted association. captain lee. thanks, lee. good morning. thanks, captain, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the 53,000 members of the airline pilot association international, welcome to the 58th air safety forum. before you begin my remarks, i'd like to direct your attention to the scenes for the special video presentation. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ..

advancing aviation safety. it's a moral imperative. the alpa pilots and staff work out error safety organizations, safety security and pilot assistance areas and with the other alpa committees related to e