Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Gaza Agreement

Joint Press Availability With European Union High Representative Javier Solana and Quartet Special Envoy Jim Wolfensohn. Travels With Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice.

Secretary Condoleezza Rice, David Citadel Hotel, Jerusalem, November 15, 2005

Secretary Rice announces the Agreement on Movement and Access between the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority in a press conference at the David Citadel Hotel. Secretary Rice was joined by James Wolfensohn,

Quartet Special Envoy for Disengagement (right) and Javier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union (left). Photo by U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv/Matty Stern. Photos: Secretary Rice's Trip to the Middle East and Asia

SECRETARY RICE: Good morning. Two months ago, Israel and the Palestinian Authority took an unprecedented step on the road to peace with the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, returning control of that territory to the Palestinian people. Israeli and Palestinian leaders have been hammering out practical arrangements to gain the benefits of that withdrawal and improve conditions in the rest of the Palestinian territories.

I am pleased to be able to announce today that Israel and the Palestinian Authority have concluded an agreement on movement and access. The Quartet’s Special Envoy Jim Wolfensohn has played a key role. Thank you, Jim. We also had important help from the European Union and I am glad that Javier Solana can join us here today. The EU, as you will learn, will play an important role in implementing this agreement.

This agreement is intended to give the Palestinian people freedom to move, to trade, to live ordinary lives. The agreement covers six topics.

First, for the first time since 1967, Palestinians will gain control over entry and exit from their territory. This will be through an international crossing at Rafah, whose target opening date is November 25th.

Second, Israel and the Palestinians will upgrade and expand other crossings for people and cargo between Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. This is especially important now because Israel has committed itself to allow the urgent export of this season’s agricultural produce from Gaza.

Third, Palestinians will be able to move between Gaza and the West Bank; specifically, bus convoys are to begin about a month from now and truck convoys are to start a month after that.

Fourth, the parties will reduce obstacles to movement within the West Bank. It has been agreed that by the end of the year the United States and Israel will complete work to lift these obstacles and develop a plan to reduce them.

Fifth, construction of a Palestinian seaport can begin. The Rafah model will provide a basis for planned operations.

Sixth, the parties agree on the importance of the airport. Israel recognizes that the Palestinian Authority will want to resume construction on the airport. I am encouraging Israel to consider allowing construction to resume as this agreement is successfully implemented -- construction that could, for instance, be limited to non-aviation elements.

This agreement is a good step forward. With the international community, Israel and the Palestinian Authority must keep working hard to make these measures work in practice. As they are implemented, trust can grow. Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas have shown real statesmanship in making the decisions that led to this agreement.

Meanwhile, our commitment to security is strong, as always. Progress like today’s agreement cannot continue unless there is also progress in fighting terror and obviously we all have a great interest in working together to ensure that anyone involved in criminal activities or violence will be prevented from passing through Rafah or any other crossing.

For our part, the United States will work closely with the parties to be sure that reliable security arrangements are in place.

Earlier this year, the United States dispatched General William Ward to lead a mission working on security with both sides. As General Ward completes his tour of duty, I am pleased to announce that President Bush has nominated General Keith Dayton to replace General Ward and take over as the United States Security Coordinator in an expanded mission to assist the Palestinian Authority and the state of Israel.

Palestinians and Israelis have many other concerns to address on the roadmap toward two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace. But today’s steps show that progress continues. As Palestinians move back and forth to the outside world, as they trade with their Israeli neighbors, the lives of ordinary people on both sides will change for the better.

Thank you very much, and now I would like to ask Javier to make a few remarks.

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE SOLANA: Thank you very much, Condi. I think what we have transmitted here today is a very, very important agreement. It has taken a long time to finalize but it will give the Gaza disengagement the full content in particular because the border between the Gaza and Egypt will be now opened.

And as you know from the document that you are going to read in a moment, the European Union will take the third-party role in that very important and complicated border. We are ready. We have the plans already done and prepared and by the end of the month will be in a condition to take the full responsibility and have the border function.

I hope very much it will be a successful operation. It’s not an easy task, but it will be successful and it will contribute for the first time to Palestinians to have from Gaza a border open and controlled by them with a third party there to go to Egypt.

As you know, the Philadelphia Road will be controlled by the Egyptians but the crossing border will be -- the third party will be the European Union. We assume that responsibility with full responsibility and with full (inaudible) to have a very important contribution to the finalization of the Gaza disengagement.

I want to say that Jim Wolfensohn has played a fundamental role. He is responsible of the Quartet for this negotiation and I want to thank him very, very warmly, as much as I want to say thank you to Condoleezza Rice for the long hours that we have to spend in the last days. Let’s put it that way. Thank you, Condi.

MR. WOLFENSOHN: Well, thank you very much, Javier and Madame Secretary. For us in the Quartet, this is a very important day. For more than six months we have been negotiating these points and I am very grateful to you, Madame Secretary, for giving us the push in these last hours to try and ensure that the parties would reach an agreement, and I’m grateful to them also for agreeing to come to a solution which is valid and one in which we can move forward.

The Quartet will continue to do its work in trying to assist the parties in implementing the agreements and will go further in terms of materializing the programs and the projects so that we can get beyond the issue of these preliminaries to the real question of assisting the Palestinians to build an area of hope and an area of peace. And this is something which I think now both the Israelis and the Palestinians are committed to and I appreciate very much the work that you have done, Madame Secretary, and we look forward to the next months.

SECRETARY RICE: We’ll take a couple of questions. Let’s see, Wyatt.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you. Wyatt Andrews, CBS. I know you’re close to the moment and it was a tough night, but if you can, how would you describe the critical give points on both sides?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, Wyatt, in something like this there are so many because the parties really have to establish a spirit of give and take, and I think that they did. I would characterize it in the following way: that the important thing here is that people have understood that there is an important balance between security on the one hand and on the other hand allowing the Palestinian people freedom of movement. And we -- I think the other important point is that -- well, two other important points.

I think everybody recognizes that if the Palestinian people can move more freely, if they can export their agricultural product, if they can work, that the Gaza is going to be a much better place, and indeed that it is going to be a place where the institutions of democracy can begin to take hold because people’s lives will be getting better.

I also think that it was important that there be recognition that this is obviously an ongoing process and that there needed to be multiple mechanisms and deadlines that are going to have to be met. And Jim has the unenviable task now of making certain that people stick to the deadlines and that the mechanisms are all in place. But everybody expressed their desire to have these crossings, and in particular Rafah, to operate as an internationally accepted crossing, in other words, to have the standards that we have come to associate with international crossings. And I think that a lot of work went into trying to assure that that would be the status of Rafah.

Anne.

QUESTION: If I could ask all of you to address this. As important as these details are, they are details, some of which the parties themselves have said they were very close to being able to resolve before you arrived. What does it say about the whole negotiating process and ultimate process for peace that it took this much work and this much hair-pulling to get this --

SECRETARY RICE: Hair-pulling? (Laughter.) A couple of things. First of all, the parties are establishing now habits of cooperation, patterns of cooperation. But it’s no secret that after a long time with the intifadah and all that went on before with concerns on both sides -- the Israelis’ concerns about the Palestinians, the Palestinians’ concerns about what the Israelis are doing -- that sometimes underneath what appear to be details are real concerns, either philosophical concerns or real policy concerns, real security concerns. And so I’m actually not surprised that it took some time.

Remember what is happening here. The Israelis have left territory. The Palestinians now have control of that territory. There’s an international crossing. It is still a small neighborhood and of course there are therefore security concerns. So these small details actually, I think, mask pretty big issues and I think that’s the reason.

I’m also tempted to say, as a football fan, that sometimes the last yard is the hardest and I think we experienced that a bit today. But I have to applaud the spirit of cooperation of the parties. I have to applaud the difficult decisions that Prime Minister Sharon and his team and President Abbas and his team were willing to make, and I have to applaud my friend Jim Wolfensohn who was also here until 5 o’clock in the morning.

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE SOLANA: Let me add a little thing to what the Secretary has just said. This is the first time that a border is opened and not controlled by the Israelis. You remember from also all the borders, all the external borders, borders, were controlled by the Israelis. This is the first time and is the first time it’s given to them to control themselves with the help of a third party. So as you can imagine, this is a very important step that is the first time that takes place. And the security people here in Israel were very concerned about this, taking this decision, and it is understandable. But that’s why we have to take such much time to convince them and to rely on a third party to be present there.

QUESTION: Following up on that, Madame Secretary, on the border issue, it’s the understanding of everyone that that was the toughest inning, perhaps. Can you, without going into too much detail, tell us what will be the Israelis’ role, perhaps behind the scenes, that was giving them enough comfort to accept this agreement -- the role of the Rafah crossing?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, the Rafah crossing, as Javier has just said, is an international crossing, the Palestinians on one side, Egyptians on the other, with third-party help. But it is in everybody’s interest to cooperate to try to make sure that this is a safe crossing and so, you know, there are many ways in which security cooperation was once very, very strong between the various parties. There is, in the agreement, you will see that the U.S., the Egyptians, the Palestinians and the Israelis are going to have a committee that is going to work on implementation and coordination.

So there are plenty of mechanisms for people to have their say, but I want to emphasize what Javier said, and it is a major step forward for the Palestinian people in their own movement toward independence in this region, and that is that they have control on one side, the Egyptians on the other. It’s an international border. It will need a third party and obviously nobody wants to have this be a border that is unsafe and so I suspect that everybody will cooperate as much as they possibly can.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, one more?

QUESTION: Can I have one?

SECRETARY RICE: These two, and then I’ve really got to go. Peter.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, traditionally you’ve been saying this is an Israeli-Palestinian process. Traditionally you’ve been saying this is an Israeli-Palestinian process and you’ve sort of been behind the scenes, but here you really put your own personal prestige on the line, especially when you came back from Jordan. Why did you decide to go down to the mat on a personal level this time?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, Jim and I had had a discussion about the remaining issues and about the need to really try to close them now. It has been going on for some time because these are hard issues. And again, underneath what may seem like very small details, there are hard issues.

And I felt that here in the region perhaps I could give it an extra push. I’m still a big believer in having the parties do as much as they possibly can do. I mean, the Gaza withdrawal was remarkable in that the coordination was between the parties. There was really very little kind of trilateral effort in the Gaza -- the actual withdrawal itself. There was a lot of coordination, a lot of discussion, a lot of cooperation. That’s really the model. But from time to time, as has been in the case in the past, it will need the Quartet envoy, it will need the Quartet, it will need the U.S. Security Coordinator, and from time to time I suspect it will need me or maybe even higher authorities -- meaning the President. Not really higher authorities. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: What about --

SECRETARY RICE: Oh, sorry, Robin. I promised.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY RICE: Israeli?

QUESTION: Spanish news agency. Well, what you asked -- go ahead.

QUESTION: Can you tell us to what degree the elections or prospect of elections played a role in making the two sides come to some kind of an agreement? And secondly, beyond the specifics of this agreement, what is the next great challenge that you face in trying to jump-start or generate movement in the process?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, you know, everybody is aware that the Palestinian election is coming up and I think that everybody would like to move this along, obviously, as that date comes forward. But it was not really a major issue at the table. People weren’t saying, you know, we really have to hurry this up because there are about to be elections.

I think whenever you get to a place that you are pretty close, not there but pretty close, you’re best off to try to close it when you can. And Jim and I really had had the key conversation when he said to me, I think before I left the United States, you’re going to go and we knew that he was to have a meeting today and that we needed to try to close it. So it was more the momentum itself of where we thought the negotiations were.

And in terms of --

QUESTION: What’s next?

SECRETARY RICE: -- what’s next --

QUESTION: Beyond the specifics of this.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, there are huge challenges: the security situation; the improvement of the Palestinian security services, which by the way the EU is devoting a lot of resources and time to as well; the ability therefore to provide a Palestinian security force that can not only fight terror but can really make certain that there’s law and order in the Palestinian territories. I think that’s a huge challenge. And President Abbas said it again yesterday; there has to be -- you know, they have to be able to do that for the Palestinian people as well as for their international obligations.

Obviously, there are challenges because we continue to press the parties, the Israelis, not to undertake any decisions or any steps that are going to prejudge a final settlement. And we need to continue to make that case.

I also think building the institutions, democratic institutions in the Palestinian territories, is an important challenge.

And getting to a place that we are really accelerating on the roadmap rather than going sort of step by step. And I think there’s a chance that if we can get through what were issues really about how Gaza was going to operate, that perhaps then we can return to the bigger issues of the roadmap.

Jim, maybe you want to say a word about that.

MR. WOLFENSOHN: Perhaps I could simply add that I think this gives us a chance to move to the fundamental question of growth and hope. Once you get through these mechanics, you can then deal with the real issues, which is how do you make life better for a million three hundred thousand people in Gaza. And so our hope is that we can move to the next phase, moving away from the technical discussions to talking about sewers, roads, jobs, houses, all the things that are really necessary to build peace. The agreements are one thing, but to try and get people to invest in their future is the other.

And let me just make one last point on the Secretary’s role. If you are an envoy of the Quartet, you have a certain amount of possibilities in negotiations. If you are the Secretary of State of the United States, I would have to say that there is a little more clout associated with that and therefore, to push it over the edge, one needs not envoys but Secretaries of State. And I want to congratulate the Secretary on having done it.

QUESTION: How much sleep did you get last night? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY RICE: I’m not telling. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: We need to know.

SECRETARY RICE: We’ll do that on background. (Laughter.)

Just between us and to the cameras, I think about two hours. Not bad. You know, it was something. But there are people who worked on this through the night, so I did well.

Last question is from the Spanish journalist.

QUESTION: Thank you. For Javier Solana, please, could you tell us some of the details about the European Union mission in Rafah crossing, how many members and what countries (inaudible) military?

And for Dr. Rice, if at all possible, could you (inaudible) any proposition now on the (inaudible) Palestinians in order to move the roadmap forward?

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE SOLANA: Let me tell you, I mean, the detail in the document is on the Gaza crossing is very, very detailed really so I cannot add much more than what is there. And the mission is already prepared. We will be about 50 - 70 people and will be policemen, experts in border, in border crossing. They will prepare from different countries. There will be a general from the Gendarmerie Carabinieri Italiani. He’s going to be appointed this morning or when they decide it’s to -- I mean, when they can arrive and meet with him, and he will be the boss of the operation. An Italian Carabienieri general.

SECRETARY RICE: We’ve tried very hard to talk to the parties about dealing with their responsibilities; in other words, when I’m with the Israelis I say let’s talk about what you need to do, not what the Palestinians need to do, and when I’m with the Palestinians I say let’s talk about what you need to do, not what the Israelis need to do. If we can get parties to deal with their own responsibilities, then this is going to move forward, and I think that’s extremely important.

Now, the security situation really does have to be addressed and the dangers of terrorism really do have to be addressed. But it is something that I think both parties understand and we’re going to work.

I want to just close this. We have a long road ahead, a long road ahead. We even have a long road ahead in the implementation of the agreement that was signed an hour ago. And I don’t want to underestimate the difficulties ahead in implementing because, as I said, these are very crucial issues.

The good thing is that the parties now have a framework with which they can work. They have an excellent envoy who will work with them. They have accepted some extremely important big principles, like a third-party involvement, and so we’ve made a step forward. But we do have not just challenges ahead to try to accelerate on the roadmap, but we have challenges ahead in implementing this agreement, too. And I have asked that every couple of weeks I can get a report on how we’re doing on the implementation of the -- moving toward the implementation of the deadlines because it’s very important now to keep this moving.

Thank you very much, and thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) signed the agreement?

SECRETARY RICE: There is no signed agreement. What we have is the Palestinians and the Israelis have agreed to these steps. The envoy is sometimes mentioned here as the party for assistance, but this is really thought to be an agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis.
2005/T19-18

Released on November 15, 2005

more at Secretary Condoleezza Rice or Condoleezza Rice and Gaza Agreement or Gaza and Palestinians or Israelis

Related: Friday, January 28, 2005 Secretary of State Rice at Swearing-In Ceremony (VIDEO), Friday, February 04, 2005 Condoleezza Rice Tony Blair Jack Straw Gerhard Schroeder, Sunday, February 06, 2005 Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Polish Prime Minister Marek Belka, Friday, February 18, 2005 Condoleezza Rice, Dutch Foreign Minister Bot (VIDEO), Saturday, February 26, 2005 Bombing in Tel Aviv, Secretary Rice, Tuesday, March 01, 2005 Secretary Condoleezza Rice London Meeting Supporting the Palestinian Authority, Tuesday, March 01, 2005 Secretary of State Condi Rice, Secretary General Kofi Annan, Tuesday, March 01, 2005 Secretary Condoleezza Rice, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier,

Senator Levin on Iraq

Setting the Record Straight: Senator Levin on Iraq

Sen. Levin (D-MI) Tries To Separate Iraq From The War On Terror. SEN. LEVIN: "But before the war, the President was saying that you cannot distinguish between Saddam Hussein and Iraq. As a matter of fact, he said that so often that he tried to connect Saddam Hussein with the attackers on us, on 9/11, so often, so frequently and so successfully, even though it was wrong, that the American people overwhelmingly thought, because of the President's misstatements that as a matter of fact, Saddam Hussein had participated in the attack on us on 9/11. That was a deception. That was clearly misinformation. It had a huge effect on the American people." (CNN's "American Morning," 11/14/05)

But Sen. Levin And Other Democrats Previously Said That Iraq Was A Part Of The War On Terror.

Sen. Levin: "The War Against Terrorism Will Not Be Finished As Long As [Saddam Hussein] Is In Power." (CNN's "Late Edition," 12/16/01)

Sen. Levin: "We Begin With The Common Belief That Saddam Hussein Is A Tyrant And A Threat To The Peace And Stability Of The Region." (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/19/02)

Sen. Clinton (D-NY): "[Saddam] Has Also Given Aid, Comfort, And Sanctuary To Terrorists, Including Al-Qaida Members, Though There Is Apparently No Evidence Of His Involvement In The Terrible Events Of September 11, 2001. ... This Much Is Undisputed." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288)

Sen. Kerry (D-MA) Says Saddam Hussein Is Part Of The "Global Menace" Of Terrorism. CNN'S LARRY KING: "What about enhancing this war, Senator Kerry. What are your thoughts on going further than Afghanistan, all terrorist places ..." KERRY: "Oh, I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/14/01)

Sen. Levin Admits That Democrats Also Believed That Saddam Hussein Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD). SEN. LEVIN: "You know, the administration continues to talk about everybody believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. That is true, but that isn't the issue." (CNN's "American Morning," 11/14/05)

Sen. Clinton: "In The Four Years Since The Inspectors, Intelligence Reports Show That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missile Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. ... It Is Clear, However, That If Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Continue To Increase His Capability To Wage Biological And Chemical Warfare And Will Keep Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288)

Sen. Rockefeller (D-WV): "There Is Unmistakable Evidence That Saddam Hussein Is Working Aggressively To Develop Nuclear Weapons. And Will Likely Have Nuclear Weapons Within The Next Five Years. And Then Could Have It Earlier If He's Able To Obtain Materials On The Outside Market Which Is Possible. Difficult But Possible." (Sen. John Rockefeller, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, Pg.S10306)

Sen. Kerry: "According To The CIA's Report, All U.S. Intelligence Experts Agree That Iraq Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons. There Is Little Question That Saddam Hussein Wants To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, pp. S10172-10173)

Rep. Pelosi (D-CA): "Saddam Hussein Certainly Has Chemical And Biological Weapons. There's No Question About That." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 11/17/02)

# # # For Immediate Release, November 14, 2005

more at President Bush or Weapons Of Mass Destruction and Saddam Hussein or WMDs or Iraq and Kerry or Clinton and Rockefeller or Levin

Related: Thursday, July 28, 2005 Killing of Algerian Diplomats to Iraq, Saturday, August 06, 2005 Operation Quick Strike, Monday, August 08, 2005 The Independent Inquiry Committee into the Iraq Oil-for-Food Programme, Monday, August 15, 2005 Iraq Draft Constitution, Monday, August 15, 2005 U.S. Support for Women in Iraq, Tuesday, August 16, 2005 President's Statement Iraqi Draft Constitution, Tuesday, August 16, 2005 Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq

The Washington Post On Pre-War Intelligence

Setting the Record Straight: The Washington Post On Pre-War Intelligence

The Washington Post Implies That The Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) Was Superior To The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Given To Congress. "But Bush does not share his most sensitive intelligence, such as the President's Daily Brief, with lawmakers. Also, the National Intelligence Estimate summarizing the intelligence community's views about the threat from Iraq was given to Congress just days before the vote to authorize the use of force in that country." (Dana Milbank And Walter Pincus, "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument," The Washington Post, 11/12/05)

But The PDB Was The Focus Of Intelligence Reform And Was More "Problematic" Than The NIE Given To Congress.

The Robb-Silberman Commission Found The PDB To Contain Similar Intelligence In "More Alarmist" And "Less Nuanced" Language. "As problematic as the October 2002 NIE was, it was not the Community's biggest analytic failure on Iraq. Even more misleading was the river of intelligence that flowed from the CIA to top policymakers over long periods of time--in the President's Daily Brief (PDB) and in its more widely distributed companion, the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief (SEIB). These daily reports were, if anything, more alarmist and less nuanced than the NIE." (Charles S. Robb And Laurence H. Silberman, The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction, 3/31/05, Pg. 14)

The Robb-Silberman Commission Reported That The Intelligence In The PDB Was Not "Markedly Different" Than The Intelligence Given To Congress In The NIE. "It was not that the intelligence was markedly different. Rather, it was that the PDBs and SEIBs, with their attention-grabbing headlines and drumbeat of repetition, left an impression of many corroborating reports where in fact there were very few sources. And in other instances, intelligence suggesting the existence of weapons programs was conveyed to senior policymakers, but later information casting doubt upon the validity of that intelligence was not." (Charles S. Robb And Laurence H. Silberman, The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction, 3/31/05, Pg. 14)

The Washington Post Implies That There Have Been No Findings On The Use Of Intelligence. "But the only committee investigating the matter in Congress, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has not yet done its inquiry into whether officials mischaracterized intelligence by omitting caveats and dissenting opinions. And Judge Laurence H. Silberman, chairman of Bush's commission on weapons of mass destruction, said in releasing his report on March 31, 2005: 'Our executive order did not direct us to deal with the use of intelligence by policymakers, and all of us were agreed that that was not part of our inquiry.'" (Dana Milbank And Walter Pincus, "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument," The Washington Post, 11/12/05)

But Congressional And Independent Committees Have Repeatedly Reported No Distortion Of Intelligence

The Bipartisan Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Report "Did Not Find Any Evidence" Of Attempts To Influence Analysts To Change Intelligence. "Conclusion 83. The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities. Conclusion 84. The Committee found no evidence that the Vice President's visits to the Central Intelligence Agency were attempts to pressure analysts, were perceived as intended to pressure analysts by those who participated in the briefings on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, or did pressure analysts to change their assessments." ("Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq," U.S. Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, 7/7/04, Pg. 284-285)

The Robb-Silberman Commission Finds "No Evidence Of Political Pressure." "These are errors serious errors. But these errors stem from poor tradecraft and poor management. The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments." (Charles S. Robb And Laurence H. Silberman, The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction, 3/31/05, Pg. 50-51)

The British Butler Report Finds "No Evidence" Of Intelligence Distortion. "In general, we found that the original intelligence material was correctly reported in [Joint Intelligence Committee] assessments. An exception was the '45 minute' report. But this sort of example was rare in the several hundred JIC assessments we read on Iraq. In general, we also found that the reliability of the original intelligence reports was fairly represented by the use of accompanying quali cations. We should record in particular that we have found no evidence of deliberate distortion or of culpable negligence. We examined JIC assessments to see whether there was evidence that the judgements inside them were systematically distorted by non-intelligence factors, in particular the in uence of the policy positions of departments. We found no evidence of JIC assessments and the judgements inside them being pulled in any particular direction to meet the policy concerns of senior of cials on the JIC." ("Review Of Intelligence On Weapons Of Mass Destruction," Report Of A Committee Of Privy Counsellors, 7/14/04, Pg. 110)

# # # For Immediate Release, November 13, 2005

more at President Bush or Washington Post and Pre-War Intelligence or Presidential Daily Brief and National Intelligence Estimate or Weapons Of Mass Destruction

Related: Thursday, July 14, 2005 Joe Wilson's Top Ten Worst Inaccuracies And Misstatements, Friday, July 15, 2005 Joe Wilson vs.Select Committee on Intelligence, Sunday, July 17, 2005 Captive Nations Week, 2005, Sunday, July 17, 2005 From The New York Times???, Sunday, July 24, 2005 Iraqi, American Women Discuss Constitution, Women's Rights

Sen. Kennedy On Iraq

Setting the Record Straight: Sen. Kennedy On Iraq

"It is regrettable that Senator Kennedy has chosen Veteran's Day to continue leveling baseless and false attacks that send the wrong signal to our troops and our enemy during a time of war. It is also regrettable that Senator Kennedy has found more time to say negative things about President Bush then he ever did about Saddam Hussein. If America were to follow Senator Kennedy's foreign policy, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, he would be oppressing and occupying Kuwait."

- Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary

Sen. Kennedy On Iraq

Sen. Kennedy Said Saddam Hussein Was Developing WMDs: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." (Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Remarks At The Johns Hopkins School Of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C., 9/27/02)

Sen. Kennedy: "Saddam Hussein Is A Dangerous Figure. He's Got Dangerous Weapons." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 10/6/02)

Sen. Kennedy Now Says The President Manipulated Facts About Iraq's WMDs: "'Instead of providing open and honest answers about how we will achieve success in Iraq and allow our troops to begin to come home,' Kennedy said, 'the president reverted to the same manipulation of facts to justify a war we never should have fought.'" (Deb Riechmann, "Bush Forcefully Attacks Critics Of The War In Iraq," Associated Press, 11/11/05)

Sen. Kennedy Opposed Removing Saddam Hussein From Kuwait. (S.J.Res.2, CQ Vote #2: Adopted 52-47: R 42-2; D 10-45, 1/12/91, Kennedy Voted Nay)

Sen. Kennedy Opposed Removing Saddam Hussein From Power. (H. J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48- 1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kennedy Voted Nay)

# # # For Immediate Release, November 11, 2005

more at President Bush or Senator Kennedy and Saddam Hussein or WMDs or Iraq and foreign policy

Related: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES TRAVELS TO BAGHDAD, Friday, July 08, 2005 Killing of Egyptian Envoy to Iraq, Ihab al-Sherif, Wednesday, July 13, 2005 U.S. Soldier, Iraqi children killed in attack, Thursday, July 14, 2005 AL QAIDA LEADERS CAPTURED IN IRAQ, Thursday, July 28, 2005 Killing of Algerian Diplomats to Iraq

Testing toxicity of nanomaterials

Brown University scientists testing toxicity of nanomaterials

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- Materials science is getting small – on the order of the atomic scale. Fibers, spheres, crystals and films 1,000 times thinner than human hair hold the promise of producing faster cars and planes, more powerful computers and satellites, better microchips and batteries. Inventors even plan to use nanomaterials to make artificial muscle, military armor and medicines.
Nanomaterials can already be found in sunscreens, concrete, tennis rackets, car bumpers and wrinkle-resistant clothes. But are they safe?

Through a new four-year, $1.8-million National Science Foundation grant, Brown University scientists are testing a variety of nanomaterials to see how they interact with human and animal cells. The aim: Find out which sizes, shapes, compounds and coatings damage or kill cells. That information can be used to manufacture non-toxic types.

"The question isn't whether nanomaterials are good or bad," said Robert Hurt, a Brown professor of engineering and the lead investigator on the project. "The question is which are toxic? Under what conditions? And can we make and purify them in different ways to avoid toxicity – to make 'green' nanomaterials?"

The grant supports important early work at Brown in an emerging field of environmental health.

According to the Institute of Medicine, the federal government last year invested nearly $1 billion in nanotechnology, yet little is known about how engineered nanoparticles affect human health. To fill the knowledge gap, the National Science Foundation and other government agencies are spending a total of $38.4 million this fiscal year in research on the environmental, health and safety aspects of nanomaterials. A journal, Nanotoxicology, was launched this year along with the first database of research on the biological and environmental impacts of nanoparticles.

Hurt said nanoparticles have captured the imaginations of materials scientists and chemists because they have desirable properties such as extreme strength or outstanding electrical or thermal conductivity. However, a small number of animal studies show that some nanomaterials can damage brain or lung tissue or block blood flow.

To better understand which materials are toxic and which are safe, the Brown project takes a multidisciplinary approach.

In the Division of Engineering, Hurt and colleague Gregory Crawford are creating carbon nanotubes, fibers and spheres – all popular in electronics – by the billions. Crawford is arranging the materials on glass slides based on size, shape and chemical composition, a novel "chip" platform that will allow for precise, systematic testing.

The chips will then head to Jeffrey Morgan and Agnes Kane at Brown Medical School.

Morgan, a biologist and tissue engineer, will test the materials' affect on lab-grown human skin cells. Kane, a pathologist, will test the materials on macrophages, cells that defend against foreign invaders, culled from mice. Both will check to see if cells die, incur DNA damage or trigger exaggerated immune defenses.

Phil Brown, professor of sociology and environmental studies, will explore the social and ethical implications of nanotechnology and how to communicate health exposure risks to the public, including faculty and students who work with nanomaterials in campus labs.

### Public release date: 11-Nov-2005 Contact: Wendy Lawton Wendy_Lawton@brown.edu 401-863-1862 Brown University

more at Chemistry and mechanical engineering or computer science and computer engineering or Nanotechnology and Nanotech or Science and macrophages

Related: Sunday, October 23, 2005 single-molecule car, 'Nanocar', Sunday, August 28, 2005 Writing at the nanoscale, Thursday, May 26, 2005 discontinuous palladium, siloxane self-assembled monolayer, Sunday, May 08, 2005 Center for Nanoscale Materials, Monday, April 25, 2005 Nanomagnets, Nanocomposite, Monday, March 21, 2005 porphyrin tubes may lead to new nanodevices, inexpensive hydrogen fuel

President Veterans Day, Discusses War on Terror (VIDEO)

President Commemorates Veterans Day, Discusses War on Terror, FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Tobyhanna Army Depot, Tobyhanna, Pennsylvania 11:45 A.M. EST

President George W. Bush gestures as he delivers remarks on the war on terror, Friday, Nov. 11, 2005 at the Tobyhanna Army Depot in Tobyhanna, Pa. White House photo by Eric Draper

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Thank you all for coming, please be seated. Thanks for the warm welcome. I'm glad to be back in Pennsylvania and I'm proud to be the first sitting President to visit Monroe County. (Applause.) I'm especially pleased to see so many military veterans with us today. Those who have risked their lives for our freedom have the respect and gratitude of our nation on Veterans Day and on every day. (Applause.)

Tobyhanna is a fitting place to commemorate Veterans Day. In the better part of a century, this facility has provided critical services for our armed forces. Around the clock and around the world, personnel from here maintain technology that our troops use to take the fight to the enemy. From Afghanistan to Kuwait to Baghdad International Airport, technicians from Tobyhanna are carrying out dangerous missions with bravery and skill. I know you're proud of them, and so is the Commander-in-Chief. (Applause.)

Tobyhanna is also home to a thriving community of military families. Your support for those who wear the uniform and your support of each other through difficult times brings great pride to our country. The American people stand with our military families. (Applause.)

I want to thank Colonel Ellis for allowing me to come and give you this speech today. Thank you for your service to our country, Colonel Ellis. (Applause.) I want to thank Senator Specter and Congressman Kanjorski and Congressman Sherwood for joining us today. It was good to have them on Air Force One. (Applause.) I appreciate their service to our country. And I want to thank all the state and local officials, and I want to thank all the veterans. (Applause.)

Today, our nation pays tribute to those veterans, 25 million veterans who have worn the uniform of the United States of America. Each of these men and women took an oath to defend America -- and they upheld that oath with honor and decency. Through the generations, they have humbled dictators and liberated continents and set a standard of courage and idealism for the entire world. This year, 3.5 million veterans celebrate the 60th anniversary of freedom's great victory in World War II. A handful of veterans who live among us in 2005 stood in uniform when World War I ended 87 years ago today. These men are more than a hundred years old, many of their lives have touched three different centuries, and they can all know that America will be proud of their service. (Applause.)

On Veterans Day, we also remember the troops who left America's shores but did not live to be thanked as veterans. On this Veterans Day, we honor the courage of those who were lost in the current struggle. We think of the families who lost a loved one; we pray for their comfort. And we remember the men and women in uniform whose fate is still undetermined -- our prisoners of war and those missing in action. America must never forget their courage. And we will not stop searching until we have accounted for every soldier and sailor and airman and Marines missing in the line of duty. (Applause.)

All of America's veterans have placed the nation's security before their own lives. Their sacrifice creates a debt that America can never fully repay. Yet, there are certain things that government can do; my administration remains firmly committed to serving America's veterans. (Applause.)

Since I took office, my administration has increased spending for veterans by $24 billion -- an increase of 53 percent. (Applause.) In the first four years as President, we increased spending for veterans more than twice as much as the previous administration did in eight years, and I want to thank the members of the Congress and the Senate for joining me in the effort to support our veterans. (Applause.)

We've increased the VA's medical care budget by 51 percent, increased total outpatient visits, increased the number of prescriptions filled, and reduced the backlog of disability claims. We've committed more than $1.5 billion to modernizing and expanding VA facilities so that more veterans can get better care closer to home. We've expanded grants to help homeless veterans in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, because we strongly believe no veteran who served in the blazing heat or bitter cold of foreign lands should have to live without shelter in this country. (Applause.)

I've joined with the veterans groups to call on Congress to protect the flag of the United States in the Constitution of the United States. (Applause.) In June, the House of Representatives voted for a constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration. I urge the United States Senate to pass this important amendment. (Applause.)

At this hour, a new generation of Americans is defending our flag and our freedom in the first war of the 21st century. The war came to our shores on September the 11th, 2001. That morning, we saw the destruction that terrorists intend for our nation. We know that they want to strike again. And our nation has made a clear choice: We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity; we will not tire or rest until the war on terror is won. (Applause.)

In the four years since September the 11th, the evil that reached our shores has reappeared on other days, in other places -- in Mombasa and Casablanca and Riyadh and Jakarta and Istanbul and Madrid and Beslan and Taba and Netanya and Baghdad, and elsewhere. In the past few months, we have seen a new terror offensive with attacks on London and Sharm el-Sheikh, another deadly strike in Bali, and this week, a series of bombings in Amman, Jordan, that killed dozens of innocent Jordanians and their guests.

All these separate images of destruction and suffering that we see on the news can seem like random, isolated acts of madness -- innocent men and women and children who have died simply because they boarded the wrong train, or worked in the wrong building, or checked into the wrong hotel. Yet, while the killers choose their victims indiscriminately, their attacks serve a clear and focused ideology -- a set of beliefs and goals that are evil, but not insane.

Some call this evil Islamic radicalism; others, militant Jihadism; and still others, Islamo-fascism. Whatever it's called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. This form of radicalism exploits Islam to serve a violent, political vision: the establishment, by terrorism, subversion and insurgency, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These extremists distort the idea of jihad into a call for terrorist murder against Christians and Hindus and Jews -- and against Muslims, themselves, who do not share their radical vision.

Many militants are part of a global, borderless terrorist organization like al Qaeda -- which spreads propaganda, and provides financing and technical assistance to local extremists, and conducts dramatic and brutal operations like the attacks of September the 11th. Other militants are found in regional groups, often associated with al Qaeda -- paramilitary insurgencies and separatist movements in places like Somalia, the Philippines, Pakistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Algeria. Still others spring up in local cells -- inspired by Islamic radicalism, but not centrally directed. Islamic radicalism is more like a loose network with many branches than an army under a single command. Yet these operatives, fighting on scattered battlefields, share a similar ideology and vision for the world.

We know the vision of the radicals because they have openly stated it -- in videos and audiotapes and letters and declarations and on websites.

First, these extremists want to end American and Western influence in the broader Middle East, because we stand for democracy and peace, and stand in the way of their ambitions. Al Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden, has called on Muslims to dedicate, their "resources, their sons and money to driving the infidels out of our lands." The tactics of al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists have been consistent for a quarter of a century: They hit us, and expect us to run.

Last month, the world learned of a letter written by al Qaeda's number two leader, a guy named Zawahiri. And he wrote this letter to his chief deputy in Iraq -- the terrorist Zarqawi. In it, Zawahiri points to the Vietnam War as a model for al Qaeda. This is what he said: "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam -- and how they ran and left their agents -- is noteworthy." The terrorists witnessed a similar response after the attacks on American troops in Beirut in 1983 and Mogadishu in 1993. They believe that America can be made to run again -- only this time on a larger scale, with greater consequences.

Second, the militant network wants to use the vacuum created by an American retreat to gain control of a country -- a base from which to launch attacks and conduct their war against non-radical Muslim governments. Over the past few decades, radicals have specifically targeted Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and Jordan for potential takeover. They achieved their goal, for a time, in Afghanistan. And now they've set their sights on Iraq. In his recent letter, Zawahiri writes that al Qaeda views Iraq as, "the place for the greatest battle." The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity. We must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war against the terrorists. (Applause.)

Third, these militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia. Zawahiri writes that the terrorists, "must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq." He goes on to say: "[T]he jihad ... requires several incremental goals. ... Expel the Americans from Iraq. ... Establish an Islamic authority over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraqo Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq."

With the greater economic, military and political power they seek, the terrorists would be able to advance their stated agenda: to develop weapons of mass destruction; to destroy Israel; to intimidate Europe; to assault the American people; and to blackmail our government into isolation.

Some might be tempted to dismiss these goals as fanatical or extreme. They are fanatical and extreme -- but they should not be dismissed. Our enemy is utterly committed. As Zarqawi has vowed, "We will either achieve victory over the human race or we will pass to the eternal life." (Applause.) And the civilized world knows very well that other fanatics in history, from Hitler to Stalin to Pol Pot, consumed whole nations in war and genocide before leaving the stage of history. Evil men, obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience, must be taken very seriously -- and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply.

Defeating the militant network is difficult, because it thrives, like a parasite, on the suffering and frustration of others. The radicals exploit local conflicts to build a culture of victimization, in which someone else is always to blame and violence is always the solution. They exploit resentful and disillusioned young men and women, recruiting them through radical mosques as pawns of terror. And they exploit modern technology to multiply their destructive power. Instead of attending far-away training camps, recruits can now access online training libraries to learn how to build a roadside bomb or fire a rocket-propelled grenade -- and this further spreads the threat of violence, even within peaceful democratic societies.

The influence of Islamic radicalism is also magnified by helpers and enablers. They've been sheltered by authoritarian regimes -- allies of convenience like Iran and Syria -- that share the goal of hurting America and modern Muslim governments, and use terrorist propaganda to blame their own failures on the West, on America, and on the Jews. This week the government of Syria took two disturbing steps. First, it arrested Dr. Kamal Labwani for serving as an advocate for democratic reform. Then President Assad delivered a strident speech that attacked both the Lebanese government and the integrity of the Mehlis investigation into the assassination of Lebanon's former prime minister.

The government of Syria must do what the international community has demanded: cooperate fully with the Mehlis investigation and stop trying to intimidate and de-stabilize the Lebanese government. The government of Syria must stop exporting violence and start importing democracy. (Applause.)

The radicals depend on front operations, such as corrupted charities, which direct money to terrorist activity. They are strengthened by those who aggressively fund the spread of radical, intolerant versions of Islam into unstable parts of the world. The militants are aided as well by elements of the Arab news media that incite hatred and anti-Semitism, that feed conspiracy theories, and speak of a so-called American "war on Islam" -- with seldom a word about American action to protect Muslims in Afghanistan and Bosnia and Somalia and Kosovo and Kuwait and Iraq; or our generous assistance to Muslims recovering from natural disasters in places like Indonesia and Pakistan. (Applause.)

Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions in Iraq -- claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals. I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001. (Applause.) The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse. The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom -- and, yet, the militants killed more than 150 Russian schoolchildren in Beslan.

Over the years these extremists have used a litany of excuses for violence: the Israeli presence on the West Bank, the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia, the defeat of the Taliban, or the Crusades of a thousand years ago. In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with inalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of killers -- and no concession, bribe, or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder. On the contrary, they target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence. Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, we will never give in, we will never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century. Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist, led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses. Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that this road -- that this is the road to paradise -- though he never offers to go along for the ride. (Applause.)

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life. We have seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg and Margaret Hassan and many others. In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I don't feel your pain ... because I believe you're an infidel." And in spite of this veneer of religious rhetoric, most of the victims claimed by the militants are fellow Muslims.

Recently, in the town of Huwaydar, Iraq, a terrorist detonated a pickup truck parked along a busy street lined with restaurants and shops, just as residents were gathering to break the day-long fast observed during Ramadan. The explosion killed at least 25 people and wounded 34. When unsuspecting Muslims breaking their Ramadan fast are targeted for death, or 25 Iraqi children are killed in a bombing, or Iraqi teachers are executed at their school, this is murder, pure and simple -- the total rejection of justice and honor and morality and religion. (Applause.)

These militants are not just the enemies of America or the enemies of Iraq, they are the enemies of Islam and they are the enemies of humanity. And we have seen this kind of shameless cruelty before -- in the heartless zealotry that led to the gulags, the Cultural Revolution, and the killing fields.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies. In truth, they have endless ambitions of imperial domination -- and they wish to make everyone powerless, except themselves. Under their rule, they have banned books, and desecrated historical monuments, and brutalized women. They seek to end dissent in every form, to control every aspect of life, to rule the soul itself. While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing a future of oppression and misery.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy is dismissive of free peoples -- claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and decadent. Zarqawi has said that Americans are, "the most cowardly of God's creatures." But let us be clear: It is cowardice that seeks to kill children and the elderly with car bombs, and cuts the throat of a bound captive, and targets worshipers leaving a mosque.

It is courage that liberated more than 50 million people from tyranny. It is courage that keeps an untiring vigil against the enemies of rising democracies. And it is courage in the cause of freedom that will once again destroy the enemies of freedom. (Applause.)

And Islamic radicalism, like the ideology of communism, contains inherent contradictions that doom it to failure. By fearing freedom -- by distrusting human creativity and punishing change and limiting the contributions of half a population -- this ideology undermines the very qualities that make human progress possible, and human societies successful. The only thing modern about the militants' vision is the weapons they want to use against us. The rest of their grim vision is defined by a warped image of the past -- a declaration of war on the idea of progress itself. And whatever lies ahead in the war against this ideology, the outcome is not in doubt. Those who despise freedom and progress have condemned themselves to isolation and decline and collapse. Because free peoples believe in the future, free peoples will own the future. (Applause.)

We didn't ask for this global struggle, but we're answering history's call with confidence, and with a comprehensive strategy. Defeating a broad and adaptive network requires patience, constant pressure, and strong partners in Europe and in the Middle East and North Africa and Asia and beyond. Working with these partners, we're disrupting militant conspiracies, we're destroying their ability to make war, and we're working to give millions in a troubled region a hopeful alternative to resentment and violence.

First, we're determined to prevent attacks of the terrorist networks before they occur. We are reorganizing our government to give this nation a broad and coordinated homeland defense. We're reforming our intelligence agencies for the incredibly difficult task of tracking enemy activity -- based on information that often comes in small fragments from widely scattered sources, both here and abroad. And we're acting, along with governments from other countries, to destroy the terrorist networks and incapacitate their leadership.

Together with our partners, we've disrupted a number of serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th -- including several plots to attack inside the United States. Our coalition against terror has killed or captured nearly all those directly responsible for the September the 11th attacks. We've captured or killed several of bin Laden's most serious deputies, al Qaeda managers and operatives in more than 24 countries; the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing, who was chief of al Qaeda's operations in the Persian Gulf; the mastermind of the bombings in Jakarta and Bali; a senior Zarqawi terrorist planner, who was planning attacks in Turkey; and many of their senior leaders in Saudi Arabia.

Because of this steady progress, the enemy is wounded -- but the enemy is still capable of global operations. Our commitment is clear: We will not relent until the organized international terror networks are exposed and broken, and their leaders are held to account for their murder. (Applause.)

Second, we're determined to deny weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes, and to their terrorist allies who would use them without hesitation. (Applause.) The United States, working with Great Britain and Pakistan and other nations, has exposed and disrupted a major black-market operation in nuclear technology led by A.Q. Khan. Libya has abandoned its chemical and nuclear weapons programs, as well as its long-range ballistic missiles.

And in the past year, America and our partners in the Proliferation Security Initiative have stopped more than a dozen shipments of suspect weapons technology, including equipment for Iran's ballistic missile program. This progress has reduced the danger to free nations, but it has not removed it. Evil men who want to use horrendous weapons against us are working in deadly earnest to gain them. And we're working urgently to keep the weapons of mass murder out of the hands of the fanatics.

Third, we're determined to deny radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists, and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror. The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally guilty of murder. (Applause.)

Fourth, we're determined to deny the militants control of any nation, which they would use as a home base and a launching pad for terror. This mission has brought new and urgent responsibilities to our armed forces. American troops are fighting beside Afghan partners and against remnants of the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies. We're working with President Musharraf to oppose and isolate the militants in Pakistan. We're fighting the regime remnants and terrorists in Iraq. The terrorist goal is to overthrow a rising democracy, claim a strategic country as a haven for terror, destabilize the Middle East, and strike America and other free nations with increasing violence. Our goal is to defeat the terrorists and their allies at the heart of their power, so we will defeat the enemy in Iraq. (Applause.)

Our coalition, along with our Iraqi allies, is moving forward with a comprehensive plan. Our strategy is to clear, hold, and build. We're working to clear areas from terrorist control, to hold those areas securely, and to build lasting, democratic Iraqi institutions through an increasingly inclusive political process. In recent weeks, American and Iraqi troops have conducted several major assaults to clear out enemy fighters in Baghdad, and parts of Iraq.

Two weeks ago, in Operation Clean Sweep, Iraq and coalition forces raided 350 houses south of Baghdad, capturing more than 40 of the terrorist killers. Acting on tips from local citizens, our forces have recently launched air strikes against terrorist safe houses in and around the towns of Ubaydi and Husaybah. We brought to justice two key senior al Qaeda terrorist leaders. And in Mosul, coalition forces killed an al Qaeda cell leader named Muslet, who was personally involved in at least three videotaped beheadings. We're on the hunt. We're keeping pressure on the enemy. (Applause.)

And thousands of Iraqi forces have been participating in these operations, and even more Iraqis are joining the fight. Last month, nearly 3,000 Iraqi police officers graduated from 10 weeks of basic training. They'll now take their places along other brave Iraqis who are taking the fight to the terrorists across their own country. Iraqi police and security forces are helping to clear terrorists from their strongholds, helping to hold onto areas that we've cleared; they're working to prevent the enemy from returning. Iraqi forces are using their local expertise to maintain security, and to build political and economic institutions that will help improve the lives of their fellow citizens.

At the same time, Iraqis are making inspiring progress toward building a democracy. Last month, millions of Iraqis turned out to vote, and they approved a new constitution that guarantees fundamental freedoms and lays the foundation for lasting democracy. Many more Sunnis participated in this vote than in January's historic elections, and the level of violence was lower.

Now, Iraqis are gearing up for December 15th elections, when they will go to the polls to choose a government under the new constitution. The new government will serve a four-year term, and it will represent all Iraqis. Even those who voted against the constitution are now organizing and preparing for the December elections. Multiple Sunni Arab parties have submitted a list of candidates, and several prominent Sunni politicians are running on other slates. With two successful elections completed, and a third coming up next month, the Iraqi people are proving their determination to build a democracy united against extremism and violence. (Applause.)

The work ahead involves great risk for Iraqis and for American and coalition forces. We've lost some of our nation's finest men and women in this war on terror. Each of these men and women left grieving families and left loved ones at home. Each of these patriots left a legacy that will allow generations of fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty. Each loss of life is heartbreaking. And the best way to honor the sacrifice of our fallen troops is to complete the mission and to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. (Applause.)

The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we've ever faced, unconstrained by any notion of our common humanity or by the rules of warfare. No one should underestimate the difficulties ahead, nor should they overlook the advantages we bring to this fight.

Some observers look at the job ahead and adopt a self-defeating pessimism. It is not justified. With every random bombing, with every funeral of a child, it becomes more clear that the extremists are not patriots or resistance fighters -- they're murderers at war with the Iraqi people themselves.

In contrast, the elected leaders of Iraq are proving to be strong and steadfast. By any standard or precedent of history, Iraq has made incredible political progress -- from tyranny, to liberation, to national elections, to the ratification of a constitution -- in the space of two-and-a-half years. (Applause.)

I have said, as Iraqis stand up, Americans will stand down. And with our help, the Iraqi military is gaining new capabilities and new confidence with each passing month. At the time of our Fallujah operations a year ago, there were only a few Iraqi army battalions in combat. Today, there are nearly 90 Iraqi army battalions fighting the terrorists alongside our forces. (Applause.) General David Petraeus says, "Iraqis are in the fight. They're fighting and dying for their country, and they're fighting increasingly well." This progress is not easy, but it is steady. And no fair-minded person should ignore, deny, or dismiss the achievements of the Iraqi people. (Applause.)

And our debate at home must also be fair-minded. One of the hallmarks of a free society and what makes our country strong is that our political leaders can discuss their differences openly, even in times of war. When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support. I also recognize that some of our fellow citizens and elected officials didn't support the liberation of Iraq. And that is their right, and I respect it. As President and Commander-in-Chief, I accept the responsibilities, and the criticisms, and the consequences that come with such a solemn decision.

While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs.

They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. And many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security." That's why more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate -- who had access to the same intelligence -- voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power. (Applause.)

The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. (Applause.) These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them. (Applause.) Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. (Applause.) And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory. (Applause.)

The fifth element of our strategy in the war on terror is to deny the militants future recruits by replacing hatred and resentment with democracy and hope across the broader Middle East. This is difficult, and it's a long-term project, yet there is no alternative to it. Our future and the future of the region are linked. If the broader Middle East is left to grow in bitterness, if countries remain in misery while radicals stir the resentment of millions, then that part of the world will be a source of endless conflict and mounting danger, in our generation and for the next.

If the peoples of that region are permitted to choose their own destiny, and advance by their own energy and participation of free men and women, then the extremists will be marginalized, and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow and eventually end. By standing for hope and freedom of others, we make our own freedom more secure.

America is making this stand in practical ways. We're encouraging our friends in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to take the path of reform, to strengthen their own societies in the fight against terror by respecting the rights and choices of their own people. We're standing with dissidents and exiles against oppressive regimes, because we know that the dissidents of today will be the democratic leaders of tomorrow. We're making our case through public diplomacy -- stating clearly and confidently our belief in self-determination, and the rule of law, and religious freedom, and equal rights for women -- beliefs that are right and true in every land and in every culture. (Applause.)

As we do our part to confront radicalism and to protect the United States, we know that a lot of vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself. And the work is beginning. Many Muslim scholars have already publicly condemned terrorism, often citing Chapter 5, Verse 32 of the Koran, which states that killing an innocent human being is like killing all of humanity, and saving the life of one person is like saving all humanity. (Applause.) After the attacks July -- on July 7th in London, an imam in the United Arab Emirates declared, "Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person." The time has come for responsible Islamic leaders to join in denouncing an ideology that exploits Islam for political ends, and defiles a noble faith. (Applause.)

Many people of the Muslim faith are proving their commitment at great personal risk. Everywhere we've engaged the fight against extremism, Muslim allies have stood up and joined the fight, becoming partners in this vital cause. Afghan troops are in combat against Taliban remnants. Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al Qaeda in their country. These brave citizens know the stakes -- the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own tradition -- and the United States of America is proud to stand beside them. (Applause.)

With the rise of a deadly enemy and the unfolding of a global ideological struggle, our time in history will be remembered for new challenges and unprecedented dangers. And yet this fight we have joined is also the current expression of an ancient struggle -- between those who put their faith in dictators, and those who put their faith in the people. Throughout history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that murder is justified to serve their grand vision -- and they end up alienating decent people across the globe. Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that regimented societies are strong and pure -- until those societies collapse in corruption and decay. Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that free men and women are weak and decadent -- until the day that free men and women defeat them.

We don't know the course of our own struggle will take, or the sacrifices that might lie ahead. We do know, however, that the defense of freedom is worth our sacrifice, we do know the love of freedom is the mightiest force of history, and we do know the cause of freedom will once again prevail. (Applause.)

Thank you for coming. May God bless our veterans, may God bless our troops in harm's way, and may God continue to bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

END 12:35 P.M. EST, For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, November 11, 2005

more at President Bush or Veterans Day and War on Terror or veterans and terrorism or al Qaeda and military or Syria and Iraq

Related: Thursday, November 03, 2005 Veterans Day, 2005, Wednesday, November 10, 2004 Veterans Day, 2004, Thursday, March 31, 2005 President Discusses Schiavo, WMD Commission Report, Tuesday, April 12, 2005 President Discusses War on Terror Fort Hood, Texas, Friday, April 22, 2005 President on Senate Confirmation of Negroponte, Monday, May 16, 2005 Terrorism, New Search Engine Seeks Hidden Vulnerabilities, Thursday, May 19, 2005 Ambassador John Negroponte, General Mike Hayden (VIDEO), Saturday, May 28, 2005 Zarqawi, Owwi ?, Wednesday, June 29, 2005 President Addresses Nation, Discusses Iraq, War on Terror, Tuesday, July 12, 2005 President Discusses War on Terror at FBI Academy (VIDEO)

Presidential Podcast 11/12/05

Presidential Podcast 11/12/05

Subscribe to Our Odeo Podcast Channel and receive the Presidential Radio Address each week. Featuring real audio amd full text transcript

more at President Bush or Medicare and health care or prescription drug coverage or health

Related: Saturday, November 12, 2005 bush radio address 11/12/05 full audio, text transcript, Saturday, November 05, 2005 Presidential Podcast 11/05/05, Saturday, November 05, 2005 bush radio address 11/05/05 full audio, text transcript, Monday, October 31, 2005 President Nominates Judge Samuel A. Alito (VIDEO), Saturday, October 29, 2005 bush radio address 10/29/05 full audio, text transcript, Saturday, October 22, 2005 Presidential Podcast 10/22/05, Saturday, October 15, 2005 Presidential Podcast 10/15/05, Saturday, October 08, 2005 bush radio address 10/08/05 full audio, text transcript

Freedom Calendar 11/12/05 - 11/19/05

November 12, 2001, President George W. Bush proclaims National American Indian Heritage Month.

November 13, 2002, U.S. Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH) elected as Chair of House Republican Conference; she is highest-ranking woman in House majority leadership in U.S. history.

November 14, 1824, Birth of U.S. Rep. James Ashley (R-OH), author of constitutional amendment to ban slavery.

November 15, 1983, President Ronald Reagan’s nominee to Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Susan Meredith Phillips, confirmed as first woman to serve as Chairman.

November 16, 1948, Death of California Republican Florence Kahn, first Jewish woman to serve in U.S. House of Representatives, 1925-37.

November 17, 2003, First generation immigrant, Austrian-American Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, sworn in as Governor of California.

November 18, 1872, Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for 'the Republican ticket, straight'

November 19, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln delivers Gettysburg Address, calling for 'a new birth of freedom'.

“We continue to work for an America where individuals are celebrated for their abilities, not judged by their disabilities.”

George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States

SOURCE: 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar more at Freedom Calendar or Republican and Republicans or African-Americans and Abraham Lincoln or Indian Heritage Month

Related: Saturday, November 05, 2005 Freedom Calendar 11/05/05 - 11/12/05, Thursday, November 03, 2005 National American Indian Heritage Month, Saturday, October 29, 2005 Freedom Calendar 10/29/05 - 11/05/05, Saturday, October 22, 2005 Freedom Calendar 10/22/05 - 10/028/05, Saturday, October 15, 2005 Freedom Calendar 10/15/05 - 10/022/05, Thursday, September 29, 2005 The Opelousas Massacre

bush radio address 11/12/05 full audio, text transcript

bush radio address 11/12/05 full audio, text transcript PODCAST

President's Radio Address

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This coming Tuesday, America's Medicare beneficiaries can begin to enroll for new prescription drug coverage. This new benefit is the greatest advance in health care for seniors and Americans with disabilities since the creation of Medicare 40 years ago.

In the past, Medicare would pay tens of thousands of dollars for ulcer surgery, but not a few hundred dollars for prescription drugs that eliminate the cause of most ulcers. In the past, Medicare would pay more than $100,000 to treat the effects of a stroke, but not $1,000 per year for blood-thinning drugs that could have prevented the stroke in the first place.

With this new prescription drug benefit, Medicare will now help pay for the prescription drugs that can prevent serious illness. Seniors will get more choices and better treatment, and America will get a Medicare system to fit the needs of the 21st century.

The new coverage will begin on January 1st. If you or someone you love depends on Medicare, I urge you to learn about the new choices you have so you can make a decision and enroll. Enrollment is entirely voluntary, and seniors who want to keep their Medicare coverage the way it is will be able to do so. But for those who want to take advantage of this new drug benefit, enrolling by May 15th will ensure you the lowest possible premiums. The sooner you enroll, the sooner you can have the peace of mind this coverage will bring.

The new prescription drug coverage will benefit people on Medicare in three important ways. First, it will help all seniors and Americans with disabilities pay for prescription drugs, no matter how they pay for their medicine now. Seniors who have no drug coverage and have average prescription drug costs will see savings of at least 50 percent. And seniors who have the highest drug costs will receive special help. Starting in January, once a senior has spent $3,600 in a year, Medicare will cover 95 percent of all prescription costs.

Second, this new coverage will offer more and better health care choices than ever before. That means seniors can save more and get the coverage they want -- not a "one size fits all" plan that does not meet their needs. Every prescription drug plan will offer a broad choice of generic and brand-name drugs, and seniors will be able to select any Medicare prescription drug plan in their area that fits their needs and their medical history.

Third, this new prescription drug coverage will provide extra help to low-income seniors and beneficiaries with disabilities. About a third of the seniors will be eligible for a Medicare prescription drug benefit that includes little or no premiums, low deductibles, and no gaps in coverage. On average, Medicare will pick up the tab for more than 95 percent of the costs that low-income seniors pay for prescription drugs.

The days of low-income seniors having to make painful sacrifices to pay for their prescription drugs are now coming to an end. Last month, those of you on Medicare received in the mail a handbook called "Medicare and You" that includes detailed information about your options. Citizen groups and faith-based organizations across America are also working to spread the word so that Medicare recipients can get their questions answered and make informed choices.

If you have Medicare, I urge you to take advantage of this opportunity to learn more. Review your choices, and make the decision that is right for you. If you have family or friends on Medicare, you can help too. Helping can be as simple as showing an older neighbor how to fill out a form, or making a call for your mom or dad. You can get information 24 hours a day by calling 1-800-MEDICARE, or by visiting the official Medicare website at Medicare.gov.

In the 21st century, preventing and treating illness often require prescription drugs. In the coming months, we will help every Medicare recipient make a confident choice about their prescription drug coverage. By expanding drug coverage for our nation's seniors, we will help all Americans on Medicare receive the modern health care they deserve.

Thank you for listening.

END For Immediate Release, November 12, 2005

more at President Bush or Medicare and health care or prescription drug coverage or health

Related: Saturday, November 05, 2005 Presidential Podcast 11/05/05, Saturday, November 05, 2005 bush radio address 11/05/05 full audio, text transcript, Monday, October 31, 2005 President Nominates Judge Samuel A. Alito (VIDEO), Saturday, October 29, 2005 bush radio address 10/29/05 full audio, text transcript, Saturday, October 22, 2005 Presidential Podcast 10/22/05, Saturday, October 15, 2005 Presidential Podcast 10/15/05, Saturday, October 08, 2005 bush radio address 10/08/05 full audio, text transcript