you like, between how resources are allocated and the effectiveness of getting action. let me give you a concrete example of this. ofthe european development policy. we have the european union level which is based on funding from the european union budget, and as the minister directly by the european commission. for thearrangements pooling of national moneys in the form of the european come fromt fund which 20 different streams and where the european commission is a service provider to coordinated. 28 national have development policies. muchlations vary as to how misallocation of resources follows from this. we have done our own analysis of this winch suggest that simply a these,programming of

coordination, would result in a savings every year. if there were to be gentlemen pooling of the policies we could be talking about tone billion euros -- 10 billion euros. this kind of work, brought together from the different committees, sometimes from legislative proposals, sometimes from general areas where there could be a better allocation of resourceses -- of could translate these figures into one coherent whole. highlights a debate that has been going on in the think tank and intellectual community of the member states of the benefits of eu spending and the potential efficiency gains from a better allocation of resources.

the bertelsmann foundation has done quite a bit of work in this. they recently published a new paper called 20 years of single market where they attempt to calculate the precise benefit to individual eu member states of the single market between 1992 and 2012. they did a piece of work about a year ago where they took the three policies, and they tried to analyze what the cost would be if there was a real nationalization -- a re-nationalization. they calculated that a 23 billion euros a year. what the potential benefits would be of having a single diplomatic service in the new, they calculated savings of between 400 20 billion and 1.3 billion euros. be.what the cost would they reckon it would be somewhere between three billion

llion and $9 bi euros. the russian paper in april of this year -- they wrote a paper in april of this year that was featured in the economist in april. they calculated that the united kingdom and denmark had benefited about as much as 20% of gdp from their membership 20%, 1973, portugal by spain by 10%, and so on. they did this for each of the large wood -- the large meant countries -- ien largement countries.

if you take the 25 air yes, about half of them are areas where the european parliament has been the driving seat of doing the analysis by way of d. in 17e done research and of the 25 areas that are listed on the page 5. on page eight,t there are very significant economic gains. the completion of the classical single market. the current figures we are using which are very conservative based on analysis that not only we have commissioned but which is available in the literature and 300of 340 billion billion respectively. there is a very large amount of

money, and to gather around 5% of the eu gdp. we have been very cautious in the way we have approached this because if you go back to the inort which klaus alluded to the 1980's, and we go back to what preceded it, another european parliament commissioned initiative as far back as 1983, the cocky relation at that time -- like [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] the calculation was that it would be 4.5% of gdp and 6.5 percent of gdp. at the moment, the analysis ng academics and others who have looked into this suggest by the time the in 2006 inrisis hit 2007 the single market have added around 2.51% to eu gdp.

recently the analysis suggested that at the moment the potential gain of the higher rent was --ee weight 2% in germany 3.2% in germany. we have always aired on the side of caution in terms of the numbers. but what has been striking is that when you build these of the figures are so high, 7.5% of gdp is a large number, but 1% of gdp in the eu which would be 130 billion euros would be equivalent to half the gdp of denmark or 1.5 the size of the gdp of our land. even the numbers that have already been generated by consensus in terms of intellectual analysis of this suggest considerable impact on the european economy. this is an ongoing project.

continue this for the foreseeable future. the literature is getting deeper all the time to our own research is getting more sophisticated. already between the first mapping the cost of non-europe in march and the second edition that came out in july, we were able to adjust our calculation from 836 billion to 994 billion, and that was mainly as a result of the further work that has been done on the two aspects of the single market. in the more general classic servicesrket goods and and capital. we have done quite a bit of work, and i think klaus alluded to this in terms of the financial crisis. what the opportunity cost is of

preventing a future financial crisis, we have had a very conservative analysis, and builds up to over 100 billion in any year. we have had a number of different headings. unemployment, coordination of fiscal policy, a common deposit guarantee scheme. projects,ambitious the one supported by the majority of you, potential gain could be considerable. taken the view expressed in the impact assessment study that was done for the european billion andf 60 then we have a number of other minor ones. where we have the greatest potential is integrated markets

were the potential gdp gain could be very considerable. that gives you a flavor of the kind of work that is being done. will be deepened and widened progressively, but it is only supporta more general which is being given to our committees. each individual committee is not interested in the global number, they are interested in how it affects their particular area. some of these issues can be relatively minor intern of the jews the gain, but can be very gdp gain,to -- but can be very important in other areas. people concerned, the benefit is intelligible -- incalculable. ability of people who might be involved in a cross-border divorce to get some kind of effect of remedy to their onlyem is calculated as

100 million, what for the people concerned it can be a life-changing event. not all of what the eu does can be quantified financially or economically in this way. is quite an important part of making the case for why european solutions can be beneficial to people. not only do they involve the extension of the muppet they can result in the economy in europe becoming more efficient. >> thank you. we are now opening it up for your comments and questions. if you could please state your name and affiliation, and wait for the microphone. is first?

>> thank you. re- ter with [inaudible] . this question is about european relations with russia currently, and the impact that the product bans, the sanctions have had on the european union. say the european union economy because it is all of the different states. so i would like to get your of how that relationship with russia is playing out. woulduld my layout -- how might play out on the economic field. >> thank you. >> we will work our way towards

the back of the room. >> thank you. i am vice president of the u.s. global peace services usa. i do not need to tell you that the united states had a big backlash against what is seen as overreaching government regulation. i wonder if you could talk about public opinion within the eu to a world where there might be greater coordination and consolidation, and how youth inc. your report might be seen -- how you think your report might be seen by the member states. >> nicolas lake, national democratic institute. my question is obviously the resources of the parliament, an analysis like this is hardly

limited to the existing member states. n analysisever been a weree non-europe states referendums might be coming? thank you. , would you like to start? >> i will start with the question on the public opinions on regulation and legislation. that in fact we should be on ideological about regulation or legislation. if you hold a general view that more is better, you are probably in the field of ideology.

, we tried to introduce a mechanism to judge on the individual case and to see whether there is benefit in regulation or legislation or not. hope the general view that less regulation is better, you might in fact not use important benefits that are out there. but equally if you believe that always more regulation is better, you might also commit important errors. this is an attempt to make this debate less ideological and have whether acase proposed set of regulation or legislation is bringing resize benefits. -- precise benefits. it is not useful to hold a view that always legislation or regulation is a burden on the country. $.28 buy one,lace this might be some positive or

not, to be seen on the individual case. of did westion calculate the effect the sanctions specifically, i am not aware of that. nevertheless, you find for gxample the very interestin products not produced by this not that see the effects of gas from russia. if it had to be replaced by other sources, water ackley the additional cost for the member states, for the european union citizens, and what are the losses also for russia? are these sources available or not? documentation is available, it is on our website, and it can be very interesting and help all in

such a situation. i surprise myself that we had see the this, but you first 20 units good come from norway at relatively little additional cost. there is potential in the parlance -- in the netherlands. then you go to algeria and so on. thoughtings have been through and calculated through, not only by our own services, sometimes by others. has beenendently but your position on the issue allows members to make a more their ownhoice about position on policy. specifically in response to the question on sanctions, we have not in the european

parliamentary research service done any analysis yet of the financial implications. we work in this area to read quest from committees -- request from committees. the committees have not been meeting over the last three months because we have been having elections and they have only just reconvened. wethey requested such work, would do it. in terms of public opinion, i think that the atmosphere in the european union is very mixed at the moment. i think there is a very lively debate about the benefits. they are often to do with identity questions which go much deeper. we saw quite a lot of that reflect it in the tone of the european elections in may. what we're trying to do in the work that we have been commissioned to undertake is to encourage evidenced-based policy

making. it is trying to find the fine grain of the discussion and try to drill down into the likely detail. that is somewhat against the grain of the way public conversation is being conducted on both sides of the atlantic. an importanthat public service that should be available to our members and our committees. the philosophy which lies behind the creation of the research service, modeled very much on the congressional research service. our clients are essentially members of the european parliament and the committees they serve on. we do make all of our publications publicly available, and that is a difference in our approach. we are responsive to members concerns, and they are the ones who reflect the views of the public. >> there was a question about

the new members. i cannot give you a detailed analysis, but we will certainly be looking into it. it does have a neck in a dimension. -- have an economic dimension. that debate is occurring at the moment in scotland about whether or not it would be at goldman -- yconomicall advantageous for scott lynn to leave the united kingdom and reapplied to the european union. >> thank you.

i wanted to follow-up on the sanctions question. did i understand you correctly that the parliament has really such aith this issue in way that it would trigger any sort of research on your part? it is a big debate. >> i think what anthony said was -- old parliament started stopped to meet the end of april, and then we have the elections in may. it means that the normal daily work of parliament has not restarted. therefore we have not received any request from committees beense members have campaigning and now we are reconstituted. a lot of the general reflection were in the services have continued and so you'll find some interesting pieces like the piece i have cited on the

gasntial effects of delivery or non-gas delivery from russia. request from committees can only come when those committees are working, and they are restarting to work next week. are reacting to committees and members rather atn proactively looking issues that might come down the pipeline? >> those are two different issues. the cost of the studies which have been mentioned here, they are commissioned by individual throughe secretaries their presidents because they have an issue which is very close to them and they say we would like to have some additional information. they are the committees asking for it. on a a lot of other issues, we are producing routine expertise

which is then available for all of the members whenever they would like it. . in-depth study which took as a whole lot of work, so we are doing this at the request of specific committee secretaries. that is very important for the legitimacy issue. the parliament is a parliament, and it consists of members. so the members basically should express where they would like to as an their interest potential precondition for a legislative initiative. >> thank you. we will take a few more questions. bemy first question would about regional security. the security varies from country to country. what is theng, potential for a terrorist to move from here to there. what can be done at the european level?

my second question would be that you mentioned further integration. what can be done? >> could you repeat the last part? integration, what can actually be done? >> that is a big question. go ahead. i am an independent business consultant. the lastpean countries several years have had many successes and total failures. how have these helped them recover? >> thank you. one more question. thank you.

thank you for the report and the interesting presentation. i noticed in the common security and defense policy you have some significant efficiency gains, but there was no mention of nato or the potential for transatlantic commonality that might add to those. as a present of as the efficiency gains are, -- impressive as the efficiency gains are, one wonders if the improved common market will not drive innovation that might even swap these significant gains? on nato, in fact in the process of preparing a component that was done on

common foreign security policy, we went to nato and had quite an in-depth discussion with them about that. their approach in what they called smart defense is what the sharing.pulling and this was a very short synopsis here, that action is about 2.5 pages long. there is a longer report of about 60 pages that goes into this in greater depth that is available. the author of that is actually here in the audience. that is something that can be followed up if you want afterwards. what i would say is that they convergence of the nato members-

that there has to be convergence toward pulling and sharing. and is overtaking the gains from this. is no longer theoretical, it is a very real proposition. this mean for individual countries and for individual citizens in terms of tactical benefits -- practical benefits? if we're going to be in an environment that security is in jeopardy, clearly making sure that we get the maximum bang for the buck is critically important. it seems to me that nato and the eu are very much on the same page. the only question is how quickly they can move. in both the nato and european

union, you have decision-making runcible that makes it difficult to overcome some of these barriers. where you have qualified in the eu, itg, is easier to get agreement on the removal of remaining difficult barriers. the progress that has been made in the single market in the last 20 years has been critically dependent upon the fact that it was possible to overcome protection because which had previously stymied the situation running up to the mid to late 1980's. it is vitally important that a decision-making in this remain one in which qualified majority voting applies. otherwise there would almost certainly be a regression to the embattled ways of the 1970's and previous.

those are my comments on defense. this raises the question that was posed concerning terrorism. free movement of people is one of the founding principles of the european union, and it is one of the european commission and the european parliament attach a lot of importance to you. freehe balance between movement on the one hand and security on the other is partly resolved by having an increasingly effective external frontier to the european union. easy,s not always particularly where you have a non-land frontier. that balances at the core of decision-making in that f ield. more and more is moved to non-majority voting, and that has made it easier for the european union, put increasingly coherent response in that field.

how will the kind of initiatives which the parliament has advocated and which is set out in this document help the member states to recover? front.ure is on the if we were able to move coherently in this direction over time, the gdp gains would help render the european economy more efficient and hopefully as a result less prone to be kind of financial crisis that we have had in the past. some of the particular policies that are freaking policies in the field of the economic policy . this is a much more targeted and of policies.

the europeanth of union is setting common standards and developing a market. it is null income -- and not at all in competition or the detriment to anybody else. so surprisingly these are issues that would be discussed in the industry committee or the internal market committee rather than the security and defense. develop five helicopters, or could this be done together? i think increasingly member states are under so much pressure financially that these kind of inefficiencies have to if a positive outcome should be expected. there is really no contradiction between the different elements.

are so underdgets pressure that we cannot afford to be inefficient in this sector anymore. we pay with enormous cuts and capacity. i think nobody can take that responsibility anymore. how we could help countries with special difficulties, economics is not an exact science. he would have probably three ways to re-create growth. the one is what is called fiscal stimulus, but to be honest that is probably not very much available. definitely not for those countries in difficulties will but overall many countries in the european union have reached their debt limits. that is very difficult.

then you have two possibilities. is to create additional efficiencies and growth potential through european cooperation, and the other one is action reform on the national level. painful.also be there is the norm as potential available on the european level, at least something which could make the burden more acceptable while easing the adaptation process that needs to be conduct ed on the national level. aboutis also the question future integration for the european union. these are suggestions for european integration which are benefit driven. they are not driven by ideology, but the question is aris there

benefit? can be proven, then probably this is an area where we should work more closely together. it is taking it a bit out of the ideological discussion, which from my point of view is very important. unionsteps in european integration are only happening by necessity. you can get in the financial services area, everyone was with their back to the wall before they agreed to take major steps. basically looking into the abyss. space oft in a ideology driven integration, but it is driven by necessity or precise benefits. >> thank you. we have a couple more questions in a minute. break downd you to

the staggering number of individual single market benefits of 340 billion euros. many of the other components we have looked at here, including the transatlantic trade agreement, i wonder if you could compare your findings, put them in the context of other has become which increasingly politically and ideologically contested in europe as well as here. but we will get more questions. >> i am looking forward to reading your study in detail. >> the 6000 pages?

>> know, the shorter version. [laughter] i wanted to pick up on the absenceyou made about of ideology and relieve the need to examine these initiatives , not technocratic, but scientific viewpoint. even if we agree that ideology role, the play a european union elections happen every so often. i wanted to ask you if you could comment from your standpoint, message do you think the technocrats, the ists, what kind of a

message to the may elections send to the european parliament members who have this very wonderful idea here? who could possibly take issue with efficiency gains? no one. peoplesdo you see the of europe, who voted and tried to send a message? how do you think the average perceive these initiatives, and what are they ,elling their representatives albeit a limited power. so she is asking you to be

ideological about your own project. a couple more questions. >> your aggregate numbers are very interesting. pages to segregate disaggregateon -- then by nation? onfor each block of the map page eight, is there a timeline for each specific area of integration to be completed? >> thank you very much for the retrospective. this is picking up something from 25 years ago. my two questions would me, 25 years ago eu was smaller.

we now have a lot or regulatory heterogeneity. this on the put table given that there are very different legal traditions in europe, come on law, civil law. they really do very historically. to thend comment relates one behind which would be this is all about efficient the gains, which goes back a point to innovation. there is nothing here about the losers. 25 years ago the losers had structural funds, what will happen now? >> thank you. very good questions. you have some leading european s in the room. >> i will try my very best. one, and the outcome of the elections, and

how do we interpret this? this was a very clear request for delivery. delivery of very precise outcomes rather than process. sometimes we are very good on process and we're not so good on outcomes. tries not to focus on process, this tries to focus on outcomes. of course it depends afterwards how would will be done. a specific these of legislation can look very differently and in the process of negotiation of benefits can get lost. but it tries to put the focus on outcomes rather than process. for me also an important message of the elections is that of benefits of integration are sometimes very unevenly distributed in society.

some might profit more, others might profit less, or not at all. expressedis has been in the new composition of parliament and in the strengthening of the more extreme sides of policy. i think your question for effects isn of those very relevant because it might be that some parts of the population are benefiting, those which are more educated and more morebile. but people was not such a good education, and who fear that the competition globally is difficult for them, fear that those benefits are not arriving with them. your question is correct, which , as outlinede need

here, 80 modernizing agenda -- a modernizing agenda. there are protections for those who are less able to compete, and that is one of the messages of the european elections. from immigration, two other otherons -- to questions. the average european this not exist. [laughter] that is my answer because it does not exist. we have very different europeans with very different capacities as to compete in such a more open system. how to cope with different in parliament we are

specialized in coping with different traditions. we are working in 24 languages, we have 28 nationalities, we have about 100 60 national parties that are working together in eight different groups. differentng these traditions together. it may be more difficult in the council, but i do not have the impression that the new members adding thesey difficulties because sometimes the impression is that the world was very easy with 15 and is very complicated with 28. i do not have this impression, especially in the more recent member states. the idea of the benefit of integration is much more present. read 20 years ago

basically living standards in ukraine and poland or person were the same. and nowadays, the average income for the polish citizen is five times the one of the ukrainians. obviously, integration is a compliment -- is accompanied with a positive experience. in ukraine why they are now not accepting not being part of that experience, and are demonstrating with european flags for an association agreement. have we ever heard of something like this you are that people are risking their lives in order to be associated with european union? that is what has been happening in ukraine because the practical

effects when looking at their beensh neighbors has extremely visible. i will leave the more technical issues to anthony. >> thank you. the digitalo markets, and effects analysis is provided in the document it self. if you look it page 32, and a footnote you will see the listing of all of the areas -- various analysis that have been done. various think tanks, consultants , and other bodies that have contributed to this. the centerto take for economic policy research as

the baseline, which was probably the most comprehensive visa research that was done at the request of the european commission. of 68.2es with a figure billion, and that was just did adjustedd -- arrested t down to 60 billion. this is the projection of what a successful outcome would be in a kind of consensus figure as we can see it in the literature. we have been very cautious in the way we have approached this. on the digital single market, likewise, you can see on the 0, a series of analyses that have done externally. we are not doing our own internal on this, but the figure which we would get from adding all of those up would come in at

650 6 billion, and we have adjusted that figure down to , because weillion think in practice it would take a very long time to realize these gains and it would involve enormous transformation of national law in various ways. it is a question of what is the timescale here. the actual timescale is in effect as long as it takes. it might take 20 years to realize it, or it might two or three. it depends upon the difficulty of lamenting -- implementing. we will be able to spell that out in more detail as the stevens. epens.s de comparison ofhe and the's report

consensus view that the benefit , that is oned 2% of the reasons we've continued to multiply down figures which come out from simple aggregation . that was a judgment that was made on that, and in news based on a practical appreciation of the reality of decision-making and the difficulty of lamenting effectively european law. this takes us to the discussion of legal systems and legal differences. withs what i agree with what klaus said. with thetly to do expansion of quantified majority voting, and also partly the culture in the council people not wanting to be seen as defeated.

there was an interesting article on this, that the small member be seen asot defeated in the council decision-making. that number of objections are voiced in the minutes of the council, there are few of them , andactual contested votes all those contested votes there is a tendency of some member withdraw their objections. is also thety length of decision-making great if you look at the recent statistics of the last five known in thet is betweens co-decision the branches of the legislature. the average time it takes to adopt european law is declining rather than extending.

partly because moore's pre-negotiated -- more is pre-negotiated. and partly because they are more cautious in the proposals they and they have also gone better at the negotiating process. the difficulty therefore is not so much in terms of hitting law passed, most legislation is adopted, about 98%. it is adopted with a wide degree of consensus, and the timescale is declining. the problem is to do with implementation and enforcement. what happens when the legislation that the member states have agreed to actually hits. when the rubber hits the road in terms of logistics in terms of implementing on the ground. we also wanted to

strengthen hi administrative support so we can scrutinize the way the legislation is being a and draw attention to weaknesses and successes in the field. what istanding all of have described, the european union is a union of law, and the culture of the new member states is a culture of wanting to make a success of the application of that law. easy from a distance to assume that there would be a reconcilable differences. the reality is that most european union long considered often, and most of the gets effectivelyter applied. part of the role of european parliament is to see where it is not implemented in the is .urrently process can occur

>> we are running out of time. i will ask for brief questions, and brief responses. i'm from germany and a fellow of the american institute of your was studies at johns hopkins. i had the privilege to be at westminster in january and to anticipate in one of those conferences. -- participate in one of those conferences. bys material could be used used by members running for parliament. requeste a specific from britain? did you make specific effort to support your british colleagues?

brookings.ired from parliament has a liaison office here in washington. i think it is the only his own office you have in the world, and it is he only example of a parliament having an embassy overseas. what has been the biggest success of your cooperation with this liaison office and congress? what is currently the biggest challenge? >> last ride day at jackson hole mario draghi concluded his speech with the following long-term- the cohesion of the euro area depends upon each country in the

achieving a sustainably high level of employment. you know how each country in the union could achieve a sustainably high level of employment? not, don't we have to contemplate the possibility breakup of the eurozone? there was one more question that we will take. would a road to a more europe. more?ated europe cost and can you elaborate on the competitive this in the digital market given that the u.s. and china are at the forefront of the digital service market now? >> let me conclude with a

question of why is this report of interest to an american public and american audience? we did not receive, during the course of the european election campaign, and a request to do any particular analysis from a member of the european parliament. are members and committees of the european parliament to do a particular piece of work on the cost and -benefit of a particular part. u.k.dy who follows the debate knows that there are various organizations and think tanks that have done work on

this and tried to influence the debate. that is the situation as it were in terms of the work that we have been doing, which is none so far. doingould the work we are be of interest to an american audience? i think because many of the issues we are dealing with here are about the issue of how far it makes sense to do things on a continental scale parent in other words, the debate you have in washington about the relationship between d.c. and the individual states is mirrored in the debate that we have in the european union about where responsibility should lie for addressing concrete questions. in most of the areas that are listed in these 25 fields, policy competence lies at eu level. in some areas and is shared, and in some areas it is will the

individual member states. you have a lively discussion about subsidiary about where the appropriate level is to take a decision to resolve a problem. this debate that set out throughout these 25 different areas is an analysis of where it may make sense to do more at the european level. there is also less, and then some that it makes no difference. the discussion that has been occurring in public discourse in recent years has been hugely in favor of repeat creation of powers from the eu back member states. certain areas where it makes sense for europe to cooperate more effectively together, and in some cases they can best done or may need to be done by the force of supernatural -- of international law adopted at union level.

if i could complement this. is good reason why this document could be interesting for britain, because it is kind of an update of the internal market. situation, and agricultural we are all integrated, but this is only 7% of the economy. are integrated in industry, but industry is maybe 25% of the andustry shrinking. where we are not very integrated, we are currently in danger of losing the internal -- internal market unless we updated to new areas.

i think it is of special interest for britain because britain has always focused for a much on the internal market. office, iliamentary think what it has wrought to us brought to us is a much better understanding and knowledge of regulatory agency that might come as a surprise. compare the two systems, in many cases where we are legislating in the european parliament, congress is not legislating. but these are decisions of the regulatory agency. we have discovered new partners. ofe we were not fully aware before, which are highly competent, present, and interested. that was something that was not available to us. we have mutually developed over the last years that we are

relevant. youtimes in this system only get some attention if you have some nuisance capacity, and that is even rational because why should you devote time on something or somebody who is not a problem? parliament on passenger name record and on the new role of parliament in trade has clearly put parliament on it is relatively quickly understood because of the role congress is playing in the washington system. u.s. learned relatively quickly that it is not an independent system, and of.to be taken care i think it is also may be that

we have been a little bit of head of our time with the finished in -- the initiative. we like to call it a free 80% of the benefits are in other burdens to trade which are very often regulatory or legislative. in fact, we are finding out -- we have let's say may be this a little bit earlier that this relationship which in the past was quickly very much run by executives, regulators and legislators are now moving to the center stage. you cannot address those issues without congress and you cannot successfully address them without the european parliament. operationalry

investment which we have made over here. we are also learning a lot because we try to build up continental democracy in the european union. that is what has been successfully and less successfully been done also in the united states. the question of every country has to deal with its own the capacity on the european union is very much limited, that is true. redistributions through this is also very much limited. that every country has to usher its own competitors. we knew this but we know it now much better. i may be leave it there.

on digitall issue and competitiveness. why is it so important and why is it so beneficial? because probably we have fallen a bit behind. when you look 15 years ago, these were european companies which were dominating the market. the situation has bury much moved on. therefore, it is important in the digital area, all the legislative preconditions are created because my conviction is we are not speaking about the digital economy, we are speaking about the economy. it is not a separate sector. step-by-step, different sectors of the economy are digitized.

my bookshop is disappearing because it is digitalized. my local general list may be disappearing because the functions go into my wristband. nobody has the check my blood pressure anymore because it is done automatically and digitally. of course, record shops do not exist and cd shop sovereign much reduced. what we're seeing is not economies developing but the economy is becoming digital. it is crucial but also the european the legislative framework is modernized in this regard. >> thank you. with that, we are at the end of the session. to them for ad very thoughtful discussion and a rich report. to usemend to all of you the website as a resource. i thank you for staying with us

for an hour and a half. now you can go back to this wonderful washington afternoon and warm up again. it is freezing in here. thank you for joining us. we are adjourned. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> the 19th amendment which granted women the right to vote was ratified on august 18, 1920. this afternoon, leaders commemorated the afternoon he with the will of women's suffrage in women's politics. nationalosted by the archives and begin to live at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span 3.

right after that, it is american history tv starting at 8:30 p.m. eastern. programs on dropping the atomic bomb over japan. where we hear about american and japanese strategies leading up to the bombings and then examine president truman's decision to use the bomb and whether it was truly necessary. american history tv starts tonight on c-span 3. on our companion network, c-span 2. it is book tv with authors addressing poverty. you can see all those programs starting at 8:00 eastern tonight on c-span 2. earlier this summer, the house ways and means committee held a meeting on the irs.conservative groups direct commissioner was questioned by paul ryan on

missing e-mails. here is a look. >> this is incredible. career.e a long >> i do not believe you. to stand on my record that it was not buried in 27 pages. most of the 27 pages were exhibits. >> being forthcoming which we knew -- investigators, congress -- >> let him answer the question. >> i didn't ask him the question. >> gentleman --

>> i realize disrupting a hearing but the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i control the time. investigating criminal wrongdoing, targeting a people based on their political elites and the e-mails and questions are lost because of a unrecoverable with a lot of i.t. professionals would question and you do not tell us about it until we ask you about it, that is not being forthcoming. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman has yielded back his time. hearing heldof the earlier this summer by the house ways and means committee. you can see the entire event tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. weekend, special

programming on the c-span network. friday night, native american history. on saturday, a debate on scottish independence. judge robertith kassman, chief justice of the second circuit court of appeals. on c-span two, book tv in prime time. friday at 8:00, in with former congressman ron paul. afterwards with william burroughs talking about his book. another chance to see that program on sunday at 9:00 eastern. c-spanican history tv on three, friday, a massive documentary on the 1969 apollo 11 moon landing. on saturday, lyndon johnson's nomination acceptance speech from the 1964 democratic convention. sunday night, i look at election laws and the legal president of bush versus gore.

find the television schedule on c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. 2-3400. at 202-67 or e-mail us at comments@c span.org. conversation,n like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. coming up next, remarks from national security policy expert peter gaffney on the recent beheading of american journalist james foley. he says the murderer is not an isolated incident and believes the u.s. government is aiding jihadists. this is about one hour. >> good afternoon. i won the coin toss. i am frank gaffney with the center for security policy and i am delighted to be here with my

friend and colleague peter brooks and with all of you. jennifer, thank you very much for including me and this really important topic in your program. i am going to talk to you principally about something that i am sure of by virtue of the newsworthiness of it. is on your mind as well as mind, phenomenon of rising jihad is him around the world. notably but not exclusively in

aq under the banner of this organization that goes by the ariane names -- varying names. it has been called the islamic state of iraq, isis, or the islamic state in the levant, isil or just plain islamic state which suggests they are in a lot of places. start -- i have a powerpoint that i am trusting will work. homage do anh oh my gosh honorary citizen -- the gathering storm. that was the title of his first book in his series on world war ii. -- lead up to that horrific i guess i can power through this

myself. another brick, samuel johnson had this to say. i think it applies equally to this. this is of course not an isolated incident. to james foley has been happening to thousands of people. isis, yes, but at the hands of the jihadists. i want to talk to you about what makes isis a particularly dangerous outfit and then talk about their friends. i think you are probably all aware of these elements. actually folks who have been in the fight for some time, notably in syria. at no smallquired measure because of the iraqi military that they confronted when they came across the border , a very substantial

arsenal, including a lot of hard yea -- our gear. it was approximated to the state of kentucky. the this is perhaps the most important of the pieces. they have very substantial resources. some of which they liberated from banks, some which they are getting from oilfields and the dams thatsale from they control. not least, as you hear more and more, they are a threat to us because of americans. passports with eu operating with them, training with them, getting battle skills of their own and presumably coming home. not least why these guys are particularly warning is because

-- worrying is because they are the strong horse now. that is a very serious problem. i would argue that this is the biggest danger. their ideology or doctrine or program or agenda. call it what you will. that is what they call it -- sharia. sharia, as we will learn, literally in arabic means the path to the water. there are probably hundreds of millions of muslims around the world, including a great many in this country who do not subscribe to sharia. they don't practice it in their own faith tradition, they don't seek to live under it, they don't want to impose it on the rest of us. i would argue for the moment they are not the problem. the problem is the guys who do. let me tell you more about what it is.

by some estimates, roughly 10% andhis body of laws dictates have to do with religious practice. which direction you pray, how often, what you watch, when you don't, would you eat, what you don't. how you interact with others. that problem is about 90% have to do with that last bit of interacting with others in a very, very aggressive fashion. i think it is fair to say i any objective standard sharia, the authoritative practice of sharia under islam is characterized by these qualities -- it is comprehensive, it is totalitarian. it is a comprehensive, legalically political program that is meant to govern the entire world. as well as the entire world of

an individual. some of the characteristics of this you are probably familiar to. flogged rather than being amputated. you see this a lot. this young lady has had several things removed as part of the massage and is him -- massage theny can be myso killed if they happen to be homosexuals or women who are of claim to have been unfaithful. this is the one that i want to focus on. it is a supremacist doctrine. its adherents believes that god has directed them to impose on all the rest of us, preferably through violence because as muhamed example, him being the perfect muslim, that is the most efficient way to do it.

i will come back to the other options. i want to emphasize this point. unfortunately, though we are a lot about the islamic state these days, they are hardly the only adherence to this doctrine who are on the march at the moment. this is a sample, and the vista say -- needless to say. i wanted to give you a sense of the name of these other outfits that have exactly the same program as isis. are practicing it in exactly the same way as isis. you would hear people say no, al qaeda thinks that isis is too ruthless and therefore has banished them. not true. having ae mafia mob fight over will control the rocket hearing -- racketeering.

there is no difference of what al qaeda will do or will do if they have a chance. forget, all of these characters are operating, as you see here, increasingly globally, including the united states. we compound the danger that isis is certainly represents. notwithstanding that, the president in responding to the beheading of an american citizen , james foley, made this statement which i want to just the stress to you because it is simply outrageous. he said -- this is an excerpt -- the islamic state speaks for no religion. no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. their ideology is bankrupt.

with alld gentlemen, due respect, that is a national security fraud. none of those three statements is true. the islamic state believes it is speaking for the faith tradition islam, and as i have shown you you can go to those other organizations and you can go to the authorities of islam -- the university, for example, in cairo. or in other major recognized institutions, including a number of them in this country, and you'll see exactly the same basic teachings. fact the slaughter of infidels is not only permissible in the koran, it is mandatory. not throughout but in the

operative passages which are those that came at the end of muhamed's life because it's sharia is based upon one principle in particular called the principle of abrogation. governs. last ark of hisnote, the life went from the. which he was in mecca and receiving direction from throughe renovations -- renovations that were teaching people to be tolerant and respectable of people in the book, christians and jews. it was at that point that he had no power and not much ability to do anything else. saw a tactical approach that was accommodationist. he was driven out and went to

medina and became rich and powerful and a leader of an army. llahrevelations from a were all about destroying the people of the book, most especially the jews. in other infidels. as to the question whether this ideology is bankrupt, let me share with you how these guys are doing it. in addition to what i showed you , where they are operating -- here. you can argue it is listed as here. these are the sort of things our government has done to help a number of these jihadist groups. running the gamut from enlisting them, engaging them in some sectarian struggles in places like syria to arming and training them and fighting for

them in places like libya. and embracing them right here in the united states in the case of the muslim brotherhood. i want to dwell on that for a moment but before i do, let me share with you this photograph because it came up in the and cheney's remarks. of theselegal release five jihadist leaders, the guys on the lower band are counterparts. these are not your one of the mill jihadists. these are top combatants. in what i called the world -- the war for the free world. turning them loose even to qatar or more broadly which is coming, i believe it is an enormous aid to the enemy. then there is this -- i think you probably picked up on this -- james o'keefe, a character,

crossing the rio grande in osama get-up.n's as you know, the insecure border is enabling people who are the real deal to come across, not just children or people seeking employment, but people seeking to take advantage of the opportunity to bring the jihads here. i want to close a little bit with these guys because this is another form of threat that we almost always miss as we focus shiny, dangling object of these violent jihadists. they are the scary guys. they are the guys that are actually killing people. there is no question they want harder structure in as well. -- they want our destruction as well.

copy have on sale here a of this book called "sharial america."reat to booke appendix to this which was also published as a separate book which you can get for free at securefreedom.org is memorandum, the strategic plan of the muslim brotherhood in north america dated 1991 and then delivered into our hands and used to great effect in the largest terrorism financing trial in american history, the holy land foundation trial. this as itst said mission statement -- the muslim brotherhood is engaged in a kind eliminatingad in and destroying western civilization from within.

by their hands, meaning yours, my friends and the rest of us. so thatas the believers western civilization is eliminated and god's religion is triumphant over all others. so, how does that work exactly? muhamed hadust said a tactical adjustment during a time where he was not powerful. this is basically the same deal. when you're not strong enough to actually use violence decisively in a nation like ours, you use this civilization jihad. these are examples of the kinds of civilization jihadist techniques that are operating all around us. if you start looking for them, you will find evidence. in academia. in the media. in our financial system.

sharia-compliant finance. ,n our courts, not leastm i in our government. we address it at length in a course that is available for free online. 10 parts,art, video-based training talks about what we can do about all of this. i will close with that. three things in particular. michele bachmann sadly leaving congress shortly but a great leader on these issues has just introduced the legislation that would designate the muslim brotherhood what it is -- a terrorist organization. in this country, engaged in the civilization kind of jihad, sedition, subversion. it is nonetheless overseas and

here engaged in the same and jihadist enterprise as isis. we need to designate them and i hope we will get that legislation enacted. here in in colorado and other states, we could use your help as well. i mentioned the courts were another place where the civilization jihadists are trying to simulate sharia. it is indicating that in dozens of states around the united states, you are seeing what you are seeing which is the effort to insinuate this foreign law that is profoundly anti-constitutional, most especially for women and children into our court system. one quick example -- in new jersey a couple of years back, a state judge was appealed to by a moroccan born american naturalized citizen woman

seeking a protective order against her husband because he was systematically torturing and raping her. judge declined to give her that protective order because he could find no evidence of criminal intent. the man was simply following his rights under sharia. for surely, overturned on appeal, but this law which basically prevents any foreign law, not sharia, any for law being used in the courts of a given state is, if they violate america's constitutional rights, is now on the books in seven states and was in the gop platform last year. we think it should be in every state. i don't have time to develop this at any length but another book that is available to you addresses a problem is of surpassing concern to me and i hope we can talk a little bit about this when peter is done.

the single most effective way that the islamist and for that matter, other enemies of this country, could take us out. by exploiting a vulnerability that has become increasingly evident mainly the lack of resiliency of our electric grid. powersctric grid which all of the other critical infrastructure of this country. without which none of it works and without which none of us work or probably live for that matter. one estimate is of the power nineout for over a year, at 10 of us will die -- nine out of 10 of us will die. this book is a compilation of 11 different studies that has been done by the united states government. it gives you the flavor of its. .

whether they looking at physical assault of the grid or cyberattacks against the grid or something that could be very --icient in taking it down detonating a nuclear weapon in space over united states unleashing an electric magnetic pulse. or even of those terrible things don't happen, despite the fact that enemies of this country have that in mind for us, even if none of those events take sune, you will find the creating very similar conditions to that nuclear detonation in space. --ry hundred 50 years everyone hundred 50 years, we of whacked with an event enormous electromagnetic energy as a result of a solar flare.

i am sorry to tell you the last time that happened was 155 years ago. the good news is as the last point to make clear we know how to fix the vulnerabilities we have. we just need your help in getting that done before one or another bad thing happens. with this cheery introduction, i will turn over the rest of the program to peter who will give you some of the really bad news. thank you very much for your attention. a look forward to your questions. [applause] >> good afternoon. that certainly was frightening but thank you very much for sharing that with us. i want to thank jennifer for having me here. i have to think my repeated appearances here is a vibrant example of the phrase "were experienc -- hope over experience.

i think we need to face this square on so i will talk about some of the other things and talk about what he talked about it in greater depth. i think to be an understatement if you are following the news that the world is unsettled. worse, the threats to u.s. interests and our security are growing. thatould reasonably argue the world is more dangerous today than at any time in the generation. if we are complacent about these threats, we could pay a very big price. let me tell you about my major concerns. i will talk a little more about isis. everybody knows who that is -- the islamic state. we are not dealing with a terrorist group. we are dealing with a terrorist army. 10 to talking about

15,000 committed jihadists working together for a singular cause. i was reading today that number may be small considering the successes they have had recently in iraq. they are drawing more people in. whoe are thousands of these are classified as foreign fighters, people from outside of iraq or syria. i have seen numbers and it is very hard to figure this out that there are foreign fighters as many as 50 to 70 countries around the world. 200oughly between 190 to countries or states in the world today. with thisou can say group, there are more terrorist in any one place at

any one time than we have ever seen before and that includes pre-9/11 afghanistan. that is frightening stuff. they have taken a large swath of land which includes iraq and s yria. they've established the muslim faith, the caliphate. left the trail of death, destruction, and depravity in their wake. bad that alre so qaeda has this about them -- disavow them. can you believe that? we are talking about almost 13 years ago. that is how bad this group is. it has america in its crosshairs. the press has reported recently and people have been talking about for quite some time that has training,

camps in iraq and syria. their headquarters and capital is in syria. have been establishing training camps, not only did teach the terrorist arts of those who will fight for the syrian regime or the iraqi to traint, but also foreign fighters to return to their native lands to undertake acts of terror at some point. ago, an, about a week unnamed u.s. intelligence official -- i believe this article was in the washington post -- said that they believe isis is trying to establish cells in europe to undertake terrorist attacks and potentially the united states. if you hear with the u.s. government is saying publicly, you can imagine there is probably a lot of other stuff they are not saying because of intelligence sources and methods. they plan to raise

al qaeda's flag over the white house. i think we need to take them for their word. is part of this problem. in my opinion, syria today is the epicenter of the violent islamic movement of the world today. no question about it. tens of thousands of committed individuals have gone there. it is a magnet for terrorist wannabes. publicly they are tracking at least 100 americans who of gone to syria and perhaps iraq to fight. that has been already at least one american suicide bomber in syria. brits will tell you because they are very concerned about the individual that undertook the act against the american journalist. they are following at least 400 british citizens would've gone to syria. they cannot sell because people

do not go to see. get their passports stamped and return home. to go to jordan or turkey. -- that they answer syria answer syria -- enter syria. there are 3000 europeans would've gone to syria and a rack to fight -- iraq to fight. there are many across the globe. when you think about europe, think about the fact that many of those people have passports and are able to come back to europe and then travel to the united states after that. syria has been involved in a terrible situation for many years -- three plus years of civil war, 150,000 people have died. is there asisis well as other hardened al qaeda groups. there is another group. they were most recently infamous for the fact they were -- you remember this a couple of weeks ago, you were talking about if you are coming out of europe,

you had to turn on your cell your cellurn off phone before boarding a plane -- we forget about the terrorist plot that never happened. it may surprise you to know there has been as many as 60 terrorist plots against the united states since 9/11. a few of those have been successful. they are terrible things. these terrorist have been able to bring these things to for lycian. we have the boston bombers, couple of recruiters killed by islamists in arkansas. we had that one spark away from setting off an suv in time square. there have been 60. some people were told you had to turn off your cell phone or computer because what was going on -- that al qaeda was in the andian peninsula planning to put explosives inside a cell phone or inside a computer to put it on an

aircraft bound to the united states and blow it up. i don't know if that threat has been lifted. out of nowhere so checking that that that is what we are dealing with. that they areup dealing with in syria. they were going to be the operatives. the massive bomb maker is in yemen. i will talk about him now. he is the underwear bomber guide. y. actuallyplot where we penetrated al qaeda and the arabian peninsula and walked off with the device afford to be used. -- before it could be used. this is the group of a bomber that was involved in the surgically implantation of explosives into human beings. in fact, i don't know if this is that a syriany is

planted a bomb inside of his brother, send him to saudi , he met with a saudi prince and was meant to kill him in a suicide bombing. his brother died in the bombing and i believe two bodyguards but the prince was not killed. this has happened already. this is what we're up against. also syria, people forget about syria's best ally. hezbollah is also fighting there to protect the regime in damascus. there is no end to this conflict. it will continue to serve as a terrorist training ground for some time to come. some of these terrorists at some point may decide not to stay in the caliphate isis and return

home. who knows what they will do then? we talked a little bit about iran. their fighting in both iraq and syria. there are operatives involved in the fight today. they're nervous about what is going on because it is a sunni group. iran is a persian country. be curtailed by the loss of an ally in damascus or a loss of ally in baghdad. these two fights are must wins. iran has ambitions in that part of the world and these two countries as well as others are key to that. unfortunately, iran's nuclear program has been little slow to. ed. maybe the centrifuges are not being used as much but they have

filed -- they have compiled enough uranium to turn it into a higher rates uranium. while these negotiations are going on, iran has time to work on its weaponization of this material. deliveryme to perfect vehicles. the u.s. government publicly has not moved off the fact that they said a few years ago that iran will have a missile capable of reaching the united states by 2015. that is next year. they can put a satellite into space. they probably have been helping the north koreans do that as well because they followed ira and that capabilityn. all of you are probably too young to remember because you probably read it in e-book. 1957.k, when the soviets but that little satellite into space we were very unhappy about that.

it was a public relations disaster for the united states as the soviets had bested us scientifically and technically. in the balance of the pentagon, the dr. strangelove there, really concerned. they knew if he could put a satellite into space and a significant payload into space or orbit, you can put a warhead anywhere. the soviets actually beat us in the race. same thing here. iranians started out with the peaceful side ally program and eventually, if they wish to, develop an intercontinental ballistic missile program. the intelligence community believes that maybe soon as next year. afghanistan -- another thing we have in them talking about but as you know, there are 30,000 americans fighting there.

i worry -- what i really worry is what we're seeing in iraq is what we will see in afghanistan in the coming years. i didn't talk a lot about iraq but it has not gone well since u.s. forces left at the end of 2011. i worry that is what we will see in afghanistan. we are reducing the troops. they will be totally gone. we may have an interim force. we are waiting for new president to get on board and have some political problems with vote counting in everything. looking for a bilateral security agreement which we never achieved with iraq which is why the forces left at one time. if we do not get that, we will not have any forces. if we stay, the president is looking at 10,000 troops but they will be all be gone by 2016 regardless of the conditions on the ground. unfortunately, we think about as we draw down the afghan forces will stand up.

we are drawing down, afghan forces are standing up but violence is also up. we are dealing with some really tough actors. we are talking about not only al also, but the taliban and the network which is probably the most active and difficult insurgents we are dealing with. my view is if afghanistan could return to its pre-9/11 state, that is a place where terrorists can plan, train, and operate and that is not good news for us. equally troubling to me is that afghanistan if you think about the geography could be used as a safe haven by pakistan taliban. they can unsettle the pakistani government. pakistan, we haven't heard much about them lately either. pakistan is a country with a nuclear arsenal of more than 100 million nuclear weapons. we know some of these groups

like al qaeda would like to get their hands on some of those nuclear weapons and there has been some concern about their arsenal. i am not in the circles where they are talking about these things but i know there has been tremendous amount of concern in the last thing we want to see is have al qaeda or anyone else get their hands on a nuclear weapon. stuff but id this think the al qaeda or offshoot thatem or affiliate, threat is growing. i talked about al qaeda in the arabian peninsula in yemen. gained prominence, i would say that they were the most dangerous group we faced. i mentioned some other plots -- the underwear plot, the printer cartridges, they have the best maker -- bomb maker. we have out. -- we havenisia

howled urea, libya, tunisia. and they were responsible for what happened in benghazi. we heard about them in the terrible kidnapping of these young schoolgirls. are also involved in a lot of terrorist acts against the government. somalia. another group we are particularly worried about because the fbi will tell you that the number of somali americans have gone there to fight. there has been a long-standing concern about will they return to the united states and will we know if they have gone and be able to do something about it if we need to? many of these groups are working together, especially the ones in africa. another concern is that each one of these groups will out -- try to outdo each other in a drive together more foot soldiers, funds, and publicity. is the most high visibility

terrorist group out there now. funding go that way, foot soldiers go that way. these other groups who also have agendas will want to field -- steal some of that away from them so there will be some rivalry and they may do some things that they won't try before to bring that publicity in their direction. another thought, the idea that their activities, these terrorist group activities like the ones i mentioned -- they are happening very far away. people say it is just a regional thing. that can change in one moment. that can go from just something in dealing with the country you are dealing with, the government to becoming a transnational or international terrorist threat, including targeting the united states. russia. it?ia is on a roll, isn't took crimea this year.

wasn't much of a response. it is supporting insurgency in eastern ukraine today. it sent what they are calling aid trucks across the border into ukraine. ukrainian government is basically saying it is an invasion. the military trucks have been painted gray and they were not escorted by the international committee of the red cross. who knows what is in those trucks because they have not been inspected. russia also has as many as 40,000 troops, combat ready troops across the border from ukraine it can certainly go in at any time they want. is a much more capable force them ukrainian army. frank would be the person to talk about this -- of u.s. government has come out and said russia is violating the treaty. a regan treaty you probably worked on. it is about forces in europe and now we find out that russia, we

believe, russia has violated that treaty, that arms control treaty. they have been threatening nato allies in recent years. russian president vladimir putin plans to restore his russia's cold war era power and prowess in my estimation and it is something we should be very concerned about. in asia, north korea. we have a new, young, and it manic leader. enigmatic leader. he is not the reformer we thought he may be. he is turning out to be quite hard-line. my concern is that he wants to make his mark on the world. he doesn't have the credentials that has grandfather has. it was somebody who was involved in the korean war or his father held theil who had

reins of power for many years under his father. this is the grandson. he doesn't feel like he has the credentials, the chops with the military, with the korean workers party to perhaps hold that party so he has been involved with a lot of purges. the concern is you may be involved in a misperception or mistake that could lead to some serious consequences on the korean peninsula. he has an increasingly robust nuclear weapons program. north korea has said three nuclear attempts. there is rumor of a fourth test but it hasn't happened yet. last year, he was able to put a satellite into space harking back to what i was talking about with iran. we believe north korea has the capability to put it into the convention until ballistics somewhere on the west coast of the united states. at some point in the future, it could become more accurate and

have a longer range. it will be even a greater threat to us. let me talk about china lastly. i am getting the hook here. there is so much to talk about. beyond the united states, or he has the potential to shape this entry more than china. any of you keeping up on the news, you know that. china is increasingly powerful whether you are talking militarily, politically, or economically. in my opinion, china would like to replace the united states in the pacific, if not globally. i think it is taking steps to do that. it has already thrown its weight around increasingly in territorial disputes in the east and south china seas with u.s. allies -- the philippines and japan. many china analysts believe they are testing american result in the pacific. unfortunately, this perception

and miscalculations could lead to dire consequences. i think as china's confidence grows, the rivalry will only intensify with the united states. living ine -- we are an increasingly dangerous world where u.s. interests face growing threats. is my view that a failure to proactively rise to the challenges with international resolve,p, diplomatic economic vitality and military strength could mean some very dark days ahead. fortunately, that choice is ours. thank you very much. [applause] >> i think we were supposed to move this. is that possible? we have a few minutes of time for questions. wasnt much longer than i

supposed to. we will take any questions we have time for. is there a microphone somewhere in the back? great. >> [indiscernible] can you hear me now? one of the things that surprised me since 9/11, and i thought we would be vulnerable to it, would be individual bombing areas like wes of saw in the mideast and southeast asia. how, we have avoided that here or is a factor that it is a plan for later on on a much grander scale? >> it is a great question. in part as peter

said, they have actually been trying to do attacks. fortunately, it has been good work on the part of our first lines of defense to prevent that from happening. some places, we have been bloody lucky. i happen to think another thing is at work and it goes back to oft arc i talked about mohammed's life and the model that the muslim brotherhood follows. i think there is a very strong sense on the part of those in the brotherhood's apparatuses in this country. there are scores, if not hundreds of them by the way. almost every muslim american organization that you hear about, notably outfits like the council of american islamic relations or the islamic society of north america, are muslim brotherhood front organizations.

i think their view is do not engage in those acts of violence. it is premature. it up only anger the americans and make our job more difficult. i think that is at work with some. not suspect peter would agree with me -- we are on borrowed time. the more we indulge this kind of behavior, the more we leave the borders porous. the more we signal weakness. the sharia interpretation of that behavior is the time has come to go violent, to make them feel subdued. >> i have a question for each of our speakers. frank, this is a question a response to what you said about some of the muslim brotherhood's actions to get into american culture. you talked about interfaith conversations.

clery, it is increasingly reaching out. is that something that should be resisted and how can that message to be delivered to our clergy? the other question is for peter. that youe major groups omitted from your discussion was talking about what is going on in israel. of iran, hamas, has distracted attention away ranianhe uranium -- i nuclear program and a lot of people that are interested in israeli politics believe that was the goal of that. is that something you believe is well? >> i think that was a good point. i couldn't talk about everything. very disturbed by the fact that

we had a friendly state in israel fighting a terrorist group today. that is something that we could see down the road won't be talk about isis. terrorist groups taking on states. hamaserpretation of what did was an act of desperation. they have been a complete failure in the gaza strip and unfortunately the palestinian people are being held hostage to their inability to govern and their policies. this is obviously something we need to be concerned about. out with thelen government in damascus, the syrian government who has been a strong supporter of them because they are actually siding with the violent islamists in syria. very muchill concerned and israel is worried about opening up the borders because of what is going to come across those borders. even egypt has closed the crossings because of those concerns.

i cannot speak for the government is israel but my interpretation is humanitarian issues -- the concern is that weapons will come in. we have seen these large number of rockets fired into israel which the iron dome missile defense system, something we should be thinking about when i talk about icbms, work tremendously. those rockets were fired indiscriminately at civilian targets. it was only because of the capabilities of those systems that the u.s. helped with that israel was able to stay protected. it was such a lopsided military engagement. yes, hamas is a major problem and a friend of iran. my cents and was an act of desperation because hamas having the muslim brotherhood in egypt did it as

an act of desperation but there are many different interpretations. with one leave you thought about sharia it would be that this really is about power, not about faith. the problem for the faith community in this country is they are being encouraged to believe it is the other way around or the power has nothing to do about it, it is just about faith. it is really in worldthe old line war ii when they came for the socialists, i did nothing. when they came for me, there was nobody left. here, manyommunity of them, has been encouraged to believe that unless they stand up for their muslim counterparts though there will be a repression of freedom of religion more broadly. you have, i