as long as we knew about the other twoisms we essentially beat back in -- again that's very how much imusing it in these -- he had dragged the country by lapels and had it to be lapels because he wanted men wearing suits, not robes. his disciple was also an educator who caused enough trouble in egypt to get himself awarded a traveling fellowship in 1948, which was the year that

albanna was killed in violence that had been generated by the muslim brotherhood. that was intended to have the benign effect of getting him out of the country for a while. regrettably for us he chose to travel to the united states and in particularly to greeley, colorado. i think it would be hard to -- he hated everything he saw. his conclusion was that americans were, as he put it, numb to faith and art, faith and religion and faith in spiritual values all together. he went back to egypt, quit the civil service and joined his muslim brotherhood. they at first welcomed the coup

against the korp law enforcement and corrupt king far uk in 1952 but became disillusioned. he was arrested and torn cherd but he continued to write and agitate, particularly against wednesday civilization generally, particularly against jews, whom he blamed for atheistic materialism and said were to be considered the worst enemies of muslims. he was arrested be a hanged in 1966. at that time many members of the brotherhood fled to todd todd. >> brian: bother was monday those who fled. monday his students were al

zawary. it came at the latest in the 1980s when a couple of fbi agents spotted a group of men taking what looked like particularly aggressive target practice at a shooting range in long island. when the agents approached they were accused of what we now call racial profiling and backed off. in november of 19930, one of those men who had been participating would assassinate a right-wing poll sgs after he

gave a speech in the ballroom of the manhattan hotel. the case was treat traeted by the manhattan das the lone act by a lone gunman. when the trade center bombings demanded he be freed by jail, it became apparent he had not been the lone bomber. they discovered one of the 1993 bombers had actually been in the hole when he was shot and further investigation disclosed another was driving what was supposed to be the getaway vehicle. when they retrieved from a warehouse materials seized from his apartment that had gone unexamined, they saw that that tooerl included documents that called for the destruction of western civilization. among other ways, by toppling

bombers. the blind sheik would later issue from jail the 9/11 attack. he and nine others tried and convicted in participating to conduct a war of urban terror in this country that included the murder, the first trade center bombing, a plot to blow up other landmarks around new york, to state who is any mubarak when he visited the nominations and on and on and on. all of this was treated as a series of crimes, unconventional crimes maybe but nearly crimes. in 1996 and again in 1998, osama

bin laden decleared he and his cohorts were at war with the united states and got little attention. in 1998, the criminal law was invoked with the usual mantra was bring them to justice. this time in an indictment that actually included bin laden as a named defendant. apparently he was unimpressed or at least undeferred because in 2000 his group, al qaeda, bombed the u. is s cole, an agent silling -- and then came september and we were told finally we were at war, which was more than 50

years after he determined that islamists would have to make war on us, about 15 years after islamist himself made it clear that they were training here for war with us and five years after osama bin laden had made it official with a declaration of war. if islamism were simply about folks that wanted to blow up folks and people that, would be bad enough. but it might be something we could deal with we have an intelligence network that sometimes detects things of our enemy. but rye vens is not the end. the end is the imposition of shari shariah. it regard the notion that people can determine the rules that govern the aspect of any of

their lives either themselves as anathema. hints of this comprehensive framework come peeking through, even in the episodes of violence and support of violence that have been the subject of prosecutions in the criminal courts in this country. so in a terrorism trial over which i provided, a conspiracy that was infiltrated by an informant so we had tape recorded discussions among the participants, there was one recorded conversation between the informant and one of the defendants as they shopped on canal street in new york for an electronic device that could be used as a detonator. the defendant commented that the society in this country was one in which anything was available, detonators, pornography, anything. he made the observation not out of admiration but out of

contempt and out of belief such society was rotten to the core and would collapse easily under pressure, which represented to him a sour of turity. there was introduced in evidence a document entitled explanatory memorandum on the strategic goal for the group. the phrase the group refers to the muslim brotherhood in america. the document was written in 1991 by a sundayier hamas leader in the united states. and explains that the islamist movement is what the memo refers to as a, quote, settlement process, unquote, to establish itself in the united states and once established to pursue a, quote, civilization jihadist, unquote, mission led by the muslim brotherhood. what the author described aptly

as stealth jihad. shariah is the law of the land within what is referred to as the home or realm of islam. that is not by the way simply in muslim countries. it is anyplace where muslims can and do exercise control. so some neighborhoods in european cities where muslims exercise control, notably in france, and even in sweden, shariah is practiced and enforced in contravention and suppression of local laws. some of those areas have become

known as no-go zones. the proposed mosque near ground zero in new york was to be named core bone a to us. the implementation of maria and the plac-- sharishariah. >> shariah itself con takens the

obligation to wage jihad among nonbelievers. it is the obligatory struggle to impose shariah world wide. that doctrine regards truces and treaties as simply temporary pauses in the struggle until muslims can resume the struggle. it permits and indeed surges diassembly for the sake of islam. there is even a word for it. the tom squire bomber was challenged at his sentencing by the judge when he professed hatred for for the united states. she asked didn't you take an oath when you became a citizen of this country? his response was, yes, but i didn't mean it. millions of them reside among us in the united states as loyal americans and millions more of them reside around the world.

there are place where is they are in power, in indonesiaia. some disregard the requirements of shariah and to that extent are some so many as noninformant. >> they include in the united states dr. zudy joser had heads the "the american islamic. that i have seen in galley proof. i just saw it yesterday and i hope you will always buy it when it's published. an australian academic recently delivered a lecture arguing there are ways in which one can use passages in the koran and episodes in the life of muhammad so as to oppose the classical shariah. it's published in the november

11, 2000 issue. the regrettable part of this story is that i'm sure as many people in this room now, first things as a catholic, not a muslim publication. but make no mistake as numerous as they may be among those who pronounce docume pronounce doctrine, the -- he said there is no moderate or immoderate islam. islam is islam, that is it. that is prime minister of the increasingly powerful and influential muslim nation of turkey. and what of the vaunted arab spring? what indeed? as events unfolded in tahrir square, we saw lots of coverage of how the driving forces of the

revolution relied on twitter and facebook but not so much public of the public rape of a cbs journalists to shouts and even less coverage of the emergence of the sinai peninsula as a refuge for hamas-trained terrorists who launched an attack that killed several israelis. he has stood up for women's rights, allowing women to participate in suicide bombings.

barely five years ago he called for the p a defender of women's rights who taught at the university of tunisia and asked she be joined on the gallows but another free thinking. we were assured this was a new breed of islamist and assured the journal editor he would not seek to ban chel because it's rel known chl -- well known. i'm sure you'll remember the parade of soviet premiers back in the 1970s who you were told must have been men of peace because they drank scotch and

listened to jazz. how has the threat been met by those who now have the responsibility of protecting us? not very well i add. during the 2008 campaign the current attorney general said the previous administration had, quote, authorized the use of torture, approved secret electron being surveillance against american citizens, secretly detained american citizens without due process of law, denied the writ of habeas corpus and authorized the use of violence. he added that we owe the american people a reckoning. that reckoning started on the second day of the administration

at the signing ceremony for the hallowed executive orders. at the ceremony the president announced through these orders we were regaining what he called the moral high ground in the struggle against terrorists. apparently he felt and for all i know still feels that the struggle itself is not stuff to claim the moral high ground. the reckoning continues in april of 2009 with a public release of what had up to then been classified department of justice memoranda analyzing the legality of the cia's interrogation procedures that were adopted after 9/11. that diskwlosh in the name of openness apparently was designed to stir a wind of outrage that would drive further reckoning. when it failed to do so because the memo himself made clear the lengths to which the cia had gone to avoid violating the law, the attorney general announced that he was reopening investigations of cia personnel involved in interrogations,

cases that had been closed after diligent investigations by career department of justice prosecutor who is had prepared detailed memos describing why they declined to proceed in each case. stunningly the attorney general testified he had not bothered to read the moment owes before reopening the cases. in november of 2009 the attorney general announced he was terminating the military commission trial of the sheik and others at guantanamo bay. he announced we will bring him to new york which will show the world we're dedicated to upholding the law and we're not afraid. apparently the military commission act was not among the

laws that needed upholding at that time. when congress held acceded to t a press conference that was remarkable for his insistence that he was right all along but going along with ignorant legislators. the president of the islamic society of north america named as an unindicted coconspiracy in the largest terrorist case ever tried in this country was invited to the white house to attend the dinner at the end of 2010. you may recall that event as the occasion where the president announced support for the construction of the mosque near ground zero in new york. the mosque that was to be named cordoba house. another muslim brotherhood affiliated organization, care, also named as an unindicted

coconspiracy was until 2008 even in the administration in which i served a target of outreach by the fbi and has systematically tried to place interns on such sensitive congressional committees as armed services, homeland security and interrogation. the evidence from the case established that care is a hamas front. al azar university, the institution of higher learning that gave us the def fin forgive guide to islam was the venue chosen by the president to deliver his famous outreach speech in cairo in twain to which he invited members of the muslim brotherhood, much to the consternation of government in egypt headed by mubarak. when our secretary of state was recently in tunisia, she was asked the following question -- after the electoral campaign starts in the united states, we noticed here in tunisia that most of the candidates from both sides run towards the zionist

lobbies to get their support in the states and afterwards after they're elected they show their support for countries like egypt. for a common arab citizen, how would you reassure and gain his trust again once given the fact that you are supporting his enemy at the same time? her answer, and this is from someone who when a questioner asked her a couple of years ago what her husband would say about a particular subject took immediate umbrage and said she was not there to channel her husband, her response to this question was that it was a "fair question." and told the questioner that "a lot of things are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention. there are comments made that certainly don't reflect the united states, don't reflect our foreign policy, don't reflect who we are as a people." she advised her questioner to "watch what will president obama says and does. he's our president. he represents all of the united

states and he will be reelected president, so i think there will be a very clear signal to the entire world what our values are and what our president believes." now, i would certainly concede that the administration in which i served was not entirely a model of clarity in confrontingis laxism. we all recall we were told immediately after 9/11able that islam is a religion of peace. the director of national security later secretary of last year went so far to say it was a religion of love and peace kidnapped by extremists. now, there are reasons for that including considerations as our experience with the treatment of japanese during world war ii which we did not and do not want to repeat and the recent phenomenon of political correctness. but understand how far we've come. imagine for a moment how president roosevelt would have been received if he had gotten up on december 8, 1941 and told congress that the peaceful

shinto religion had been kidnapped by militants. we've gone a whole lot further in that direction the last three years. the term war on terror is out, in fact, terrorism itself is out in favor of man-caused disaster. in august of 2011, the white house issued a strategy paper for dealing with what we used to call toix. it doesn't use the word terrorism in its title. it's called empowering local partners to prevent violent extremism in the united states. what's wrong with that? what's wrong with it is every single part of it. it's not only or even princip principalprincipal violence. an empowering local partners, if the local partners are organizations like care and isna is more likely to worsen than to improve our situation. the paper opens by identifying the challenge as nothing new and tells us that "throughout

history, violent extremists, individuals who support or commit idea logically motivated violence to further political goals have foreboded messages of divisi divisi divisiveness." the response is supposed to and a "community based approach" with outreach to local stakeholders. to the extent a villain is identified it's al qaeda. to the extent islam or muslims are referred to principally the targets of al qaeda's brandishments although why they would want to focus attention on muslim communities is not explained. there's no mentioning to recruitment. the document is intended to sound innocuous and it does. small wonder that it was applauded by care and organizations similarly minded. but what's the danger of such a document? well, take a long look at the social change that has overtaken

some countries in europe, including france, sweden and england. muslim enclaves are tolerated and even encouraged. that's what comes of dealing uncritically through local stakeholders. what the document also overlooks is from 9/11 onward and before, participants have been successful and unsuccessful plots have been radicalized in the west. the terrorist at the controls of the plane that was taken over by brave passengers over pennsylvania was raised in beirut where it was said he never missed a party but then he went to hamburg, germany, where it was said he never missed a prayer. majorny dal hassan who murdered 14 of his fellow soldiers in texas, the would be times square bomber, a chicago native to changed his name to david coleman headley so that he could pass for christian and pleaded guilty to conducting surveillance to help carry out

the terrorist attack in mumbai numbers november of 2008, all of these and many others were radicalized in the west. ah, but what will of the killing of osama bin laden and anwar alabama lackey? did perhaps thoses in control change their view? i would recommend before you decide that, you examine the surrounding circumstances before you determine whether what you're looking at is simply an event, an episode, or a change in policy. the bin laden killing was announced with gate fanfare as it deserved to be, but also announced with great fanfare was the fact that a trove of intelligence information had been seized by from his residence in an bat ta bad and in particular we learned the location of numerous russ al qaeda safehouses. to someone who understands the value of intelligence, make an announcement like that for the sake of a feel good moment when the main practical effect of

doing so is the loss of numerous potential targets? and what of al awlaki? the attorney general in a speech a couple weeks ago announced forcefully that the drone killing was justified and went through a list of criteria that included the certainty that al an louk can i was an operational terrorist, the likelihood that there would be few collateral victims and the unfeasibility of capture as justifying the strike against an american citizen. yet, it's interesting to contemplate how he would have obtained intelligence from him if we had captured al awlaki when all u.s. government employees are now restricted by presidential order to using the army field manual to conduct interrogations. that manual has been available on the internet for years and is rely used by terrorists as a training manual for resisting interrogations. we have no classified interrogation program at all. those who may be interrogated know precisely what to expect and they expect techniques from a manual designed forever use by the most inexperienced recruit.

when a man named abdul mutallab was captured over detroit, there wases in place as yet not interrogation program operated by the fbi and so he was warned of his miranda rights and put immediately into the criminal justice system. however, the investigations of cia operatives, that the justice department had had time to begin and to organize. that is i suggest eloquent of the priorities of those making those decisions. and what of the larger struggle against islamism? obviously, there are limits to how a government like ours can defend itself. if the first amendment's establishment clause means anything, it means our government can't pick winners and losers in doctrinal disputes. that's something muslims have to decide on their own. but it can take rationale steps to defend itself and avoid irrational steps that undermine its