i am particularly honored to be on a panel introduced by jim woolsey. i have the greatest admiration for him. the austrian physicist used to put down his worst students by saying, you're not even wrong. [laughter] that is how i am inclined to take this project i will spare you. -- i will spare you. if i say to my son what is 5 + 7711, that is wrong. -- seven and he says eleven, that is wrong. what it is has been that? what do of heard from reuel is a banana. the choice that we face is between secular dictatorship of the mubarak, or and democracy. we have to accept this democracy because even if it is islamist, it is a type of democracy. if you cast your mind back to january of 2011 when this whole business began, maybe december of 2010 with tenacious, -- tunisia, you could have made an argument that would have turned out to be wrong based on the following things. first of all, but the people at teh square -- the square where these marvelous characters. there were on their blackberries, they work socially network and progressive. -- were socially network

jim woolsey said it right the first time. you are now entering the terrorist stage. we are now seeing the proces s of totalitarianism coming into too many middle eastern countries. it is important to recognize that for what it is. it is important to see who these guys are. they come in a rainbow variety of shades of islamists -- they do not. it is black, gray, or very dark blue. i would urge people to think about -- the second treatise of government. markey is looking better and better in the middle east. if there is one country -- monarchy is looking better and better in the middle east. if there is one country that has figured it out, it is morocco. >> my basic argument for the proposition on our side of the debate is an argument for reality. open your eyes and seeing where we are today, two years into these uprisings and changes. in region of the world just narrowly focused on the middle east, which has about 20 countries, the vaccine political change in four of them. -- you have seen political change in four of them. we're at the start of a process. our response

and i was just meeting with jim woolsey the night former director of central intelligence and jim worked under president clinton as director of central intelligence last director of cia so it's a dual hand sort of thing and because there is a need to be conflict generally speaking every operation must be coordinated within the director of central intelligence that is basically a common sense thing to do with that said there is inherently friction between cia and dia and as the article stipulates and i can you know is this is we talk about this but my book operation dark heart everybody to include d.o.d. case officer trained by cia with that said the similarity ends there the d.o.t. missions are completely different often cia will will take things from vi if they like it one of the noble things about able danger which was the pre nine eleven effort is that cia did things to undermine the special operations command efforts to go after bin lot that was something that i testified to so with that said there's always friction and i don't see it getting any better with the current set of laws o

after jim woolsey's opening comments that put their side of the argument on the side of hitler-stalin and cue maybey is cower age us. if democracy is to triumph in the middle east, we oppose both parts of this resolution. islamic victory is neither inevitable nor welcome as the resolution suggests. first, inevitable, just look at elections throughout the region. historically, islamists rarely get more than a third of the vote. they don't win nonislamists lose. non-islamists divide among themselves and not that they get more than 50%, they don't. the non-islamists collectively get the more than 50%. the islamists get less. the division amongst the non islamists is what matters. look at egypt, five elections in the last two years. since the fall of mubarak, non-islamists got increasingly more votes in every single election until the presidential election when, with a candidate so tarred by the fact that he was mubarak's alter ego, they still got 48.5% of the vote. imagine if they actually had a real independent candidate, they would have won. the numbers clearly support the case that is

jim woolsey set up at the first time. start with the tennis court.you're not entering the terrorist stage. let's pray for thermidor because we are now seeing a process of -- the process of totalitarianism coming into too many middle eastern -- middle eastern countries. it's important to recognize that for what it is. it's important to see who these guys are. it's important not to deceive ourselves that they come in all kinds of the rainbow of food shades. they don't. it's black, gray or very, very dark blue. so i would urge people to think about. one last point because the nights on political philosophy. we need to learn about lock in the, but comes out of the debate about this guy called robert filner argues for monarchy. monarchy is looking better and better in the middle east. it is one country that seems to have figured it out so far as morocco and maybe that should be a model for other places as well. >> thank you, brett. ryan. >> and basic army for the proposition is an argument for reality of the opening your eyes and see where we are today tw

and spent a good deal of time, would arrive in moscow with an entourage, with the negotiators, jim woolsey from csc, the relative assistant secretary, broke them into working groups and continue the process raws participated in, there was a delay. i don't think there were any problems as a result. >> just wanted to say james baker was named secretary of state the day after george bush was selected. within a week he met with regional assistant secretaries to understand their priorities. my priorities were opportunities and challenges to include eastern europe and the soviet union, and i will say again, he said to me don't you really believe you pushed the president too fast? don't you believe you have gone too far? he said i do not believe that. the administration changed. we were asked to do interagency studies. we turned in one that showed continuing the same path and we were left out of town and wreck set with last six months. i think we lost two years. >> on this point let me say i think wheat lost momentum with iran contra during the reagan administration. >> you have a microphone up f

it's certainly not essential that if we want to defeat the great ideology that jim woolsey spoke about morning, if we want to do that great -- it's certainly not essential that we embrace people who have their ideology. because then what does that say about us? it means that we are vanquished cowards in the face of that ideology. so let us try to -- through the ones we have used in the past against other ideologies and we know it works. we can find men and women in this part of the world who will be our partners. >> okay last but not least. >> rob was make in my arguments for me until the very end there. i strongly recommend that you read jeane kirkpatrick's and my good friend bob kagan's demolition of that essay later. i would just say this. ayman al zawahiri knows what he talking these talking about when he says that democracy is -- and it's spreading through the muslim body politic and that it is perhaps the number one thing they do. the ayatollah in iran knows when he says we have to kill off democracy because in iran, where they have a fraudulent democratic system, the process of

from the start, jim woolsey, the relevant assistant secretaries broken into working groups and continuedv. but there was a delay. i don't think it set us back. i don't think there are any problems as a result of that. >> i'm going to say that james baker was named secretary of state the day after george bush was elected. within a week he met with regional assistant secretary to understand their priorities. it's only my priorities for the opportunity challenges to his soviet union. i'm on record as having said and i'll say it again, don't you really believe, don't you believe you've gone too far? i said no i do not have that. we arrested you interagency studies. we turned it one that continued the same path. we were sort of laughed out of town. i think we lost two years. >> on this point, let me just say that i think we lost our momentum during the reagan administration. >> thank you. >> you have a microphone up front. >> okay, right here, please. [inaudible] i just wanted to marvin you heard me say this wanted this would repeat. one of the lessons that really relate to iran is don't be a

after jim woolsey's opening comments that essentially put their side of the argument on this side ofhitler, stalin and albini. the fact they are even setting up your here is the resolution, if democracy is to try for the middle east, islamic the restart unavoidable and essential. i am brett opposed those parts of the prison. islamic victory is neither inevitable in her welcome the resolution just. first inevitable. just look at elections throughout the region. historically, is on this trip more than a third of the vote. they don't win. not islamist lose. not islamist divide among themselves. it is not that islamists get more than 50%. they don't. the non-islamists collectively get more than 50%. islamists get less. the divisions in lebanon is islamists are what matters. look at egypt. look at egypt. five elections in the last two years. parliamentary referenda, presidential. the followed mubarak, not islamist and increasingly more opposed in every single election until the eventual election win with the candidate, so tired by the fact he was mubarak's alter ego, they still got 48.5%