so they began to cut back and as they began to cut back, specifically, with hamas, iran rushed to fill the void. and began to provide hamas with more funds and more assistance and then by the time the elections took place in january of '06 and sanctions were put in place by the west, it was iran that completely filled whatever, you know, hamas was not getting from outside actors. >> i'll ask you one more question and then i'm going to begin to go to the audience for questions as well even though i have about 30 more questions here and about 40 more in my head and that is you also have at this point and the interesting predicament that saudi arabia and

when hamas was created it immediately appealed to iran. iran was steadfastly opposed to the process, did not want to see palestinians make peace and founded a faction as well so began to throw money in their direction. the shia suni / factor early on because there was the inherent distrust between these different sects of is on. but over the years we saw hamas and other rejectionist groups relying upon iran for operational support for weapons, financing in order to attack israel. this was their common goal and where they found working together. i would add iran actively drove a stake between the palestinian factions between fatah arafat's assassination was openly called for that appeal to certain members of hamas and resaw of this animosity grow over time due to the fact that hamas was getting the support from iran and fatah was not. the taub was being made fun of as a sellout to iran. but the pivotal point* one was in 2000 season as yasser arafat declared war against israel we began to see iran throw more support for hamas even though fat

. >> you mentioned that some elements of hamas in iran are defending the region. my question is what about hezbollah? there are some elements of hezbollah in iran. second question, what is your opinion about mousavi exactly? >> well, the regime will obviously have the ability to call upon proxy's it has set up for -- from years ago. hizbollah in lebanon, for instance. speaking of hezbollah, there are elements that are recruiting, as far as the venezuela and colombia members for hezbollah. can i call them back for additional help? evidently, they are doing that in some cases. it has been reported that hamas elements have been called by the regime for suppression inside iran right now. it is no longer question of any particular candidate, it is about the sanctity of the ballot box and sovereignty and the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. the fate of people like mr. mousavi lies, in my opinion, as it clear demarcation from the regime. you cannot on the one hand be a candidate of people demanding justice and peace of the the regime -- demanding justice vis- a-vis t

this outcome would do much to weaken the proxies of iran, hamas and as balad. this violence is directed in undermining not just israel but other governments in the region. there is little doubt that iran is engaged directly in a campaign to influence the development and direction of its neighbor to the west. iraq, are run trains and supplies groups trying to destabilize the elected iraqi government. through violence and attacks on iraqi security forces, government installations and officials. iran engages in more subtle forms of coercion in tended to shape the direction of the new iraq. the embrace of iraq by its fellow gulf states will help to contain the ambitions of iran. the iraqi people want to be your partners. given the challenges in the gulf and the rowdy of our run, you should wish to be theirs. the benefits of -- will be mutual. they want to play a constructive role. whether they can do so depends in substantial measure on the nations represented right here. for the better part of 60 years, the government of iraq has been a bad actor in the region, inf

. >> you mentioned that some elements of hamas are now in iran defending the regime. my question is about hezbollah? are there elements of hezbollah in iran? and a second question, what is your opinion of mouse wie -- mousawi? >> well, the regime will have the ability to call on things they set up years ago. speaking of hezbollah, there are elements that are recruiting as far as venezuela and colombia members for them. so it is not just in the region. this can they call them for help? evidently they are in some cases. i don't have any specific information on hezbollah, but it has been reported that hamas elements have been called in to help with repression inside iran right now. as i told you, it is no longer a question of a particular candidate. it is about the contingent sinthity of the ballot box, and the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. the fate of people like him lies in my opinion as a clear demarcation from the regime. you cannot on the one hand be a candidate of the people who are demanding justice and at the same time say you are there to preserve the sys

hamas? in the election, israel is not an issue in iraq. it is not an issue in iran. the revolutionary guards are in much more powerful positions then we think. if that is the case, we are moving towards a dictatorship. we are moving into not a military dictatorship, but they dictatorship of thugs. the military is completely out. the past 72 hours, there have been military maneuvers. the army, the navy, the air force -- i have no idea what that means. the military is having maneuvers. if we're going to go towards a dictatorship of the thugs, that is very frightening for us and for israel. i do not know what israel is going to do. i think discipline is waiting. we do not know which direction we are going. >> we are both at a crossroads and out of time. let me underline the fact that one of the themes of the presentations is how much we do not nel. being -- we do not know. being in that situation, we are best device to collect as much information as we can and not take any action right away. please join me in thanking our speakers and thank you all for attending. [appla

iran. propaganda supporting hamas' campaign of terror and calling for israel's destruction was conceived in, produced by and broadcast from iran. the fundamentalist regime in tehran isn't just an emerging threat. it doesn't just have the potential to be a threat to israel's existence. it is a threat to israel's existence. and under no circumstances whatsoever can we allow that conventional threat to become a nuclear one. especially in light of the threat of iran, and in the light of the threat extremists pose to so many innocent civilians around the globe. the importance of israel as a strategic ally and friend to the united states could not be clearer. it's hard to overstate the value of having such a stalwart democratic ally in such a critical part of the world, an ally in terms of intelligence gathering, economics, politics and culture. israel is a rose in a desert rampant with repression, a force of moderation against fundamentalism and extremism. it is an ally we can constantly depend on and count on to be with us in innational fora -- international fora. for more than six decades it h

the issue thereby becomes more intractable isn't very helpful and how were dealings with iran because indirectly hamas, hezbollah and others are involved and vice versa. if we don't have any serious movement with iran, not necessarily movement towards the real agreement but on the whole set of negotiations in which some issues might move forward more rapidly than others that is also going to create a more negative atmosphere so i would say that to our kind of interactive. i don't accept the israeli position we have to deal with iran before we get serious in the peace process but i don't take the opposite of that is true either. it is an interactive process, both issues. both issues are potentially dangerous and damaging. >> to what extent do you think this correction that is developing in the last few days especially will the fact or constrain to any extent the obama administration in terms of their post iranians election engagement efforts pure yet >> i don't think it will be let hid either way. i think that what it has on however it is elevated one specific issue very explicitly into the policy issu

issued thereby becomes more intractable, it's not going to help in our dealings with iran, because it directly hamas and hezbollah and others are involved. if we don't have any serious movement with iran, not necessarily movement with agreement, but movement on a set of negotiations in which some issues might move forward more rapidly than others, that is also going to create a more negative atmosphere in the middle east. i would say the two have interactive roles. it is an interactive process, both issues. a poisoned atmosphere, both issues are potentially dangerous and damaging. >> to what extent do you think the friction over settlements that is developing in the last few days, especially, will constrain to any extent the obama administration in terms of their post-iranian election engagement activities? >> i don't think it will limit its either way. what it has done, however, is it has elevated one specific issue into a policy issue. because the rest of his speech, there's nothing in it that is precisely binding or is precisely a clear-cut test. but this issue is cut precisely. he has put to the

iran. because indirectly hamas and hezbollah and others are involved and vice-versa. if we don't have any serious movement with the -- iran, not necessarily movement towards real agreement but serious movement on a whole set of negotiations in which some issues might move forward more rapidly than others is also going to create a more negative atmosphere in the middle east. so i would say the two are kind of interactive and i don't accepted the israeli position we have to deal with iran, resolve it before we get serious in the peace process, but i don't think the opposite of that is true, either. it is an interactive process, both issues. poison the atmosphere and both issues are potentially dangerous and damaging. >> a follow-up. to what extend, though do you think the friction of settlements developing in the last few days, especially, will affect or constrain to any stents the obama administration in terms of their post-iranian election engagement mentsz. >> i don't think it will limit it either way, i think what it has done, however, is elevated one specific issue,

there is a growing divestment movement across the country in response to iran's accelerating nuclear program. it's support of hamas and hezbollah, and hateful statements against israel perpetrated by its president and others in iran's senior leadership. unfortunately, the federal courts have ruled divestment actions undertaken against a single nation may contra detect the president's -- contradict the president's authority to enjoy exclusive authority over diplomatic relations so state and local governments undertake these measures with some legal jeopardy. the justice department in the past has taken legal action against -- against -- state and local governments in cases involving other nations. this action, thive ran sanctions en-- the iran sanctions enabling act protects the rights of state and local government to ensure pension funds are not invested in companies that did business with the regime like iran. it is carefully targeted to focus only on financial ties with iran's energy sector to hit iran where it is economically most vulnerable and the bill includes a sunset provision to lift this authorization on

possibility that iran may have nuclear weapons, the possibility that iran will continue to expand, and it has hezbollah allied with hamas in lebanon growing in power. it has hamas increasingly as a proxy on one side of israel. it has syria as a client state. is there any sense that egypt and perhaps even saudi arabia and some of the gulf states at this point would functionally ally themselves with israel against iran or is it that the enemy of my enemy can be useful but that doesn't make him my friend? .. i done of i completely by ed wood made that cover, i think it would be more of a fig leaf or anything but we know where their feelings are on the prospect of an iranian nuclear weapon and do whatever they can two hopefully for iran from achieving. >> i want to look for questions out there and make sure you have a microphone before you start to talk in moscow right over here if we can, start here. >> i have two questions. and the first is can you give some background on the fatah hamas negotiations sponsored by egypt which have been apparently totally unsuccessful, and my second question has to do with what you just all

imminent or military nuclear threat from iran, terrorist organizations or nations that harbor them. israel is currently being threatened on three fronts, hamas in the south, hezbollah in the north, and from iran which provides financial and material support to both these terrorist organizations. this threat culminated on may 20 when iran successfully tested a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 1,500 miles. iranian leaders continue to express their hatred for israel and refuse to acknowledge its right of existence. their incendiary words and actions are a threat to israel and the entire region. no nation should be subjected to these continued threats. israel has demonstrated tremendous restraint in the face of these dangers despite being continually questioned by some in the global community regarding its approach to dealing with these threats and terrorism to its citizens. israel has been and remains one of the united states of america's strongest allies. israel seeks only peace with its neighbors and a homeland secure for its people. but if an attack from iran or a terrorist organization becomes imminent, this congress should declar

destabilize iraq and killing american soldiers, iran is still a state-sponsor of terror, iran continues to supply hezbollah and hamas, terrorist organizations. now the iranian regime has turned on its own citizens and killed many of them in the streets. it is unthinkable at a time when we're celebrating freedom and independence in this country, the fourth of july, that we're going to invite into our embassies people that support this kind of terrorism. it makes no sense. and if i were talking to the president i'd say, mr. president rescind that invitation. rescind that invitation. the speaker pro tempore: are there further one-minute requests? for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise? ms. jackson lee: permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: thank you, madam speaker. it is evident by my colleagues' remarks that iran and the dilemma and complexity of its situation has grabbed hold of the hearts and minds of americans and free-loving people around the world. what struck me was the expression and the tragic ins department that caused -- inc

put it this way, start with this anyway -- in iran were to get nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, has that changed the equation for israel, hamas, fatah and the region? >> well, it puts israel in an automatic we position here is strengthens the hand of hamas, and knows it. >> basic impunity nosing that its big brother is standing behind them. the same ago for hezbollah and for syria, sudan want to get into the act which is also people overlook the iraq and sudan is also a proxy of iran. you've got these ponds that are surrounding israel and israel played a masterful game of chess to my chest was invented in persia and we can now see that even if iran doesn't get these weapons and has placed upon separately route is real, and it gets the nukes and all these factors into would they please and women even necessarily need to be a nuclear attack with israel, it could be just a toy of the missiles. the low to the 30,000 plus in their position and other 5,210,000 possibly chemical weapons in syrian hands and the homemade weapons that hamas buyers into southern israel which increasingly can now reach tell of the according to some repor

north korea banks from the food and get it all from china iran, they fun hezbollah and libya, they fund hamas. there are finding al qaeda in iraq so myself i think they are a lot more dangerous. >> guest: the caller may be right, they may be more dangerous and he certainly right that they are dangerous. >> host: this is martha in rockland, maine on democrats line. >> caller: hello? this is martha clarke in that rock landed and out like to ask mr. well, why you included insurance companies in the health equation at all. they bring nothing to the table are in the business to make money and to prevent health care. thank you. >> guest: that seems to me is an eccentric view of the current function of history of insurance companies and our country. i don't know quite how to grasp the thought of there to prevent health care. are they trying to make a profit? yes and the way you make a profit in this country is providing something that many people want to buy in there for the market is i think in nine in that sense that it gives a profit oriented company an incentive to provide products in this case

can move on to the bigger thornier ones like the nuclear program, like hamas and hezbollah and these other things. i think that iran has felt very vulnerable in the last few years, although, the sort of conventional sense or the conventional reading is that iran has been empowered because of the two u.s. wars on its borders, afghanistan and iraq. i think that iran feels very much that it's marginalized in the region and it doesn't really see any way forward to assert its authority without using these tools that it feels like it has to rely on, the nuclear program, its support for the militant groups and i think it's all sort of a much bigger picture, you know, the united states has alliances with arab states that are historically very wary of iran. iran doesn't feel as though it has any place in any gulf security arrangement. i think that if there's a real effort made to sit down and talk but i think these issues are intractable right now because of where the two governments stand. and i think that if the u.s. renounces the policy of regime change, if it -- if it adjusts its rhetoric towards iran and iran sort of t

hamas flag inside. the next call is from south brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning. this show is very good overall. thank you. uc obama being careful with iran -- it will do only one thing. what is going on in iran right now -- obama is playing politics right now and is dangerous. asked the iraqi people who are rallying there now. do you like democratic? if they say yes, then they should accept the election. because when we have an election and the united states in the party wins, go ahead. the party who loses, if you do not like it, you do not go into the street. [unintelligible] host: before we run out of time a couple of other opinion pieces. "the wall street journal" puts it this way. the president yesterday denounced the extent of the fraud and a shocking in response of the running regime to public demonstrations. he says if ahmadinejad had made such progress why such violence? they show that the president who spoke these words was nicolas sarkozy of france. this is that the rebellion which is too soon to call a revolution is turning out to be the 3:00 a.m. phone call for mr. obama. as a french president shows up the american, his insti

hamas meets these conditions. so, you know, there are people who also say that the palestinian-israeli problem needs to be settled before there can be peace in the region. that is nonsense. the problem with iran has to be settled before there can be peace in the region. we all know that iran is developing nuclear weapons. we all know that ahmadinejad has threatened to wipe israel off the face of the earth. we all hope he loses in his election this week, but whoever replaces him is not going to be much more of a moderate than he is. and so israel has the absolute right to defend its security. and the united states is israel's greatest ally, should not be putting pressure on israel to make unilateral concessions up front. that is very, very important. when president obama said the bond between israel and the united states is unbreakble, then we ought to do that in our actions as well as our words. so i thank the gentlewoman for sharing this time with me. i know we're going to continue to fight for a strong u.s.-israel ties. again, i'm glad there is bipartisan support in this congress for israel and i'm glad that we pointed out that israel has made many, many concessions for peace and has only g