For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 4, 2002
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:40 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon, White House press corps. The
President today began with his usual round of briefings. And then the
President departed for the National Security Agency, where the
President had a tour and met with workers who are on the front lines of
helping keep America safe. And then he returned to the White House,
where later this afternoon the President will meet with a group of
bipartisan senators who are deeply involved in welfare
reauthorization. And then the President will meet with a group of
welfare-to-work graduates.
These are citizens who used to be on welfare who have now found
meaningful employment, thanks to the welfare reform programs. And the
President is asking Congress to reauthorize these programs. They
expire at the end of the year, and the President is hoping that
Congress will take the initiative and support the legislation that will
increase the work requirements, and pass legislation that promotes
marriage as part of welfare reform.
And that's the highlights of the President's day today. I'll be
happy to take your questions. David.
Q Ari, on the intelligence investigation, the President said a
couple of things today. One, he said it's clear that the agencies were
not communicating properly prior to the 9/11 attacks. He also said
that now they are, that there's been a cultural shift that he's pleased
about. Does that mean that he believes the joint intelligence
briefings on the Hill now are pointless? And secondly, on what basis
does he believe that there's been a cultural shift that means that the
intelligence agencies, the FBI and the CIA, would be able to do a
better job than they did before?
MR. FLEISCHER: You essentially have two major events going on in
Washington. One is the current fight against terrorism, making certain
America is not hit again. And that is where the changes that were made
have taken place in the FBI and in the CIA -- those changes are
ongoing. And it was a reflection, as the President has pointed out
many times about the mission of the FBI used to be going after
kidnappers, going after spies, et cetera, and now it's a shift focused
on preventing a next potential terrorist attack.
That's much the focus of the administration. Congress is also
doing its part to protect the nation. Congress is taking a look back.
Congress is reviewing events leading up to September 11th,
investigating the agencies that were involved and how they received
information. And the President looks at what Congress is doing as
something that can be potentially very constructive if Congress takes
it seriously and if Congress approaches it not in a way of
finger-pointing or second-guessing, but in a way of what can we learn
to help continue to protect America. So those are the two events
really that are going on. And they should be perfectly consistent with
each other.
Q But that doesn't speak to the cultural changes. I mean, the
Justice Department and the FBI have had major counterterrorism units
going back years. Just because this administration says after 9/11
that that's going to become the sole focus, does he believe that that
just makes it so?
MR. FLEISCHER: No. But I think what does give it the greatest
likelihood of making it so is the fact that our nation got attacked and
the people who work in these agencies recognize we've gone from a
culture which was a peacetime culture of prosecution of crime to a
wartime culture that is protecting America from the next potential
attack. And it's often the case in our history that it takes momentous
developments to force change in people and in systems in the government
and throughout society.
I think people in government are going through something very much
that people in America are going through, recognizing that much did
change on September 11th, that the way things were done can no longer
be done the way it was. And frankly, I think, what you really have in
this government is people like Bob Mueller and George Tenet who were
the leading reformers in making those changes, within their own
agencies. And it's not always easy, but they are the ones who are
making that effort, and it's going to continue.
Q Just to button this up, one other thing on this. The
President believes this change has already occurred -- is that how
we're to interpret his remarks?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think he's saying it's occurring. I can walk you
through, I'd be happy to, many of the specific things that have already
been done. But these changes don't take place overnight, they take
time. You have people, as the President today referred to as number
threes, fours, fives burrowed deep into agencies that are sometimes the
slower ones to change. But there's no mistaking the fact that the
leadership, the people at the top, have brought changes to their
agencies, and are working very well together as part of those changes.
Q Ari, the President said today he was willing to listen to
President Mubarak when he comes this weekend. Is the administration
ready to set timetables on a Palestinian state?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as you know, the administration has a team of
people who are in the region. And the President is about to engage,
once again, in some high-level personal diplomacy. President Mubarak
will be visiting the President at Camp David this weekend, and then
Prime Minister Sharon will be here on Monday next week to meet with the
President. Director of the CIA George Tenet is in the region right
now, and Assistant Secretary Bill Burns is there, as well, and they've
had a series of meetings. Secretary Burns is there to discuss the
political prospects of moving forward, Director Tenet the security
prospects. The two go hand in hand.
I don't want to prejudge or get ahead of what the President will
discuss with President Mubarak. The President wants to hear exactly
what President Mubarak has on his mind. And he looks forward to
meeting him.
Q In implementing these changes in the intelligence services,
you mentioned Mr. Mueller and Mr. Tenet. You didn't mention Governor
Ridge. What's he doing?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, because I'm talking about the actual groups
that have operational responsibility at the FBI, at the CIA, I also
didn't mention the National Security Agency. There's a host of
entities, including Homeland Security, that are involved. But when it
comes to intelligence, that's a function of the CIA, as well as the
conveyance of information to the FBI. The FBI is now more involved in
the business of trying to anticipate an attack and trying to prevent
it, through the use of their resources.
The job of the Homeland Security Office is to keep pulling the
people together, is to work in great part with state and local
jurisdictions, state and local governments, sharing of information with
those entities. Homeland Security, like National Security here, is not
an operational office. It's much more a coordinating office, and an
office that then helps work with others. And in the case of Homeland
Security, as I mentioned, state and local; also directly with the
Department of Transportation, the Transportation Security
Administration, overseeing or helping to oversee changes being made at
our airports. That's part of Homeland Security.
Q So as the federal government reorganizes these core Homeland
Security responsibilities of the federal government to suss out and
prevent further terrorist attacks, Governor Ridge is on the sidelines?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, make no mistake when it comes to
reorganization of the FBI, Bob Muller and the FBI work that account.
When it comes to the CIA, Mr. Tenet and CIA work that account.
Homeland Security, as I mentioned, helps fuse the process that brings
people together. And I mentioned specifically what's happening at the
nation's airports. Many of the changes that are underway there,
Transportation Security Administration, Governor Ridge is deeply
involved in much of that. But he is not operational, nor should he
be.
Q Just to -- now in the reorganization of the responsibilities
of the federal government directed towards protecting the homeland from
further attack, when it comes to sussing it out and preventing attacks,
really it's hard to see what Governor Ridge is doing.
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I keep mentioning to you, state and local
authorities. Those are first responders. And those are people when
-- Governor Ridge, for example, is in the morning meeting now, after
September 11th. There was no Office of Homeland Security prior to
September 11th. Now there is; another specific sign of things that
have changed since the 11th.
When Governor Ridge is in the meetings and he hears what Bob
Mueller hears and he hears what George Tenet hears, he is in a position
then to help spread that information to people who need to hear that at
state governments, at local governments, at airports, as necessary, and
as deemed appropriate.
Q Ari, the President is saying today he wants one committee, not
multiple committees to investigate.
MR. FLEISCHER: Correct.
Q Does he believe then that the Senate Judiciary Committee,
which has oversight over the FBI, should not be holding hearings or
looking into what the FBI knew and how it handled that information?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there's one joint committee that's
bipartisan, bicameral, that has been set up by the Congress and charged
by Congress, with the support of the administration, to investigate
what took place prior to September 11th. There are other oversight
committees that in the normal course of their business have oversight
over budgets, budget requests, things of that nature.
What the President is suggesting to the Congress very strongly is
George Tenet, Bob Mueller, many other names I could cite who could get
called up to the Hill on a repeating basis, if that's what the Hill
decided, have other duties to the American people, as well. And those
duties are, first and foremost, to prevent the next attack. And I
don't say that casually. For every minute they spent away from their
desk up on the Hill is one less minute that they are at their desk
doing their other duties.
It's important to find the right mix and to do it well. Because
Congress does have a serious responsibility to listen to these
officials and to ask these officials questions. What the President is
suggesting is Congress should not do what often can be done and set up
a redundant system where people are endlessly paraded up to the Hill,
which takes away time that they need to spend on their other duties.
Q I just want to follow. So does the President believe then
that some hearings by other committees are understandable? Or is he
saying that he wants --
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is saying there should be one
committee, and it has already been formed by the Congress and supported
by the administration, that conducts the investigation prior to 9/11.
Q So he's against any other committees, such as Senate
Judiciary, holding any hearings?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President understands there should be one --
says there shall be one committee conducting the investigation. As I
mentioned, there is other on-sight -- oversight activities that go
on, and I think that depending on what's exactly on their agenda, it
would -- the administration would reflect on it.
Q Ari, back on Scott's question on the Middle East, if I may.
Are there are still discussions within the administration about
potentially presenting -- President Bush potentially presenting
guidelines to the negotiations ultimately leading to a creation of a
Palestinian state?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, here's what's happening. As you can see,
there's somewhat of a flurry of activity, both in the region and then
here in Washington. And I think it's fair to say that the President
will do a fair amount of listening to the leaders involved, he'll do a
fair amount of listening to his representatives who have been sent to
the region, and will determine if there's any additional actions the
United States government needs to or should potentially take after he
is able to receive this input.
One of the keys to bringing peace to the Middle East is to listen
to the parties involved and to invest in those parties, to bring a
sense of ownership not only by the Israelis and the Palestinians to
providing peace and security in the region, but the Saudis, to the
Egyptians, to the Jordanians. They, too, play a very important role in
the region. Europeans, as well, can play a role in the conference that
the Secretary is working on for the summer. All of this goes in to the
broader picture of how do you bring people together for what hopefully
will be a real and concrete result.
Q Specifically on the question of guidelines, is that something
that is still on the table in this --
MR. FLEISCHER: Can you be more specific when you say guidelines?
Q Guidelines for negotiations -- a central U.S. set of
parameters for both sides to follow with potentially the final result
being --
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the President has laid out those
parameters. They have not changed. The pillars that he announced in
his, I think it was April 4th Rose Garden speech remain the ones that
will be the guide to bring peace to the region.
Q Ari, the history of whistle-blowers in this city and this
country has not been a happy one. Usually they either lose their job
or they get shunned to Siberia -- no pun intended. But we have the
case of Coleen Rowley, who has done, according to a lot of people a
magnificent job in sending her memo, which her old boss, Mr. Mueller,
has praised. The question I want to ask you -- from the President,
is not only will she keep her job, which they say she will, but will
she not be shunned to a side job like --
MR. FLEISCHER: I think her boss, the person who makes personnel
decisions, has already addressed that fully, and Director Mueller has
indicated that she deserves praise for coming forward and offering her
thoughts. He said he doesn't agree with each and every one of them,
but the fact of the matter is she's brought information to the
attention of her superiors and he has given every assurance that she
will be treated with the respect that she is due. And that means
protection of her job. That's what the Director has said.
Q Not only the job, I'm asking whether she won't be assigned to
a --
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the boss, the Director, has addressed all
these issues, and it's his responsibility and he's addressed them.
Q Can I get a follow-up? If the intelligence committee or the
bipartisan committee finds negligence in the way information was
handled, is the President in agreement those people should be removed
--
MR. FLEISCHER: They haven't even had their first formal hearing
yet. Can you allow them to begin and have their hearings and reach
conclusions? That's the purpose of them doing it.
Q Going back to where we started here, the President was saying
this morning that he didn't believed the FBI and CIA communicated
appropriately. Is the President confident that Attorney General
Ashcroft was adequately focused on counterterrorism prior to September
11th in terms of his overall strategy for the Department of Justice?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, again, people can certainly freely look
back in hindsight at events prior to September 11th and ask a whole
series of questions. This President, as you've heard him say many
times, has deep faith and confidence in the people that are at the helm
at these agencies. And his focus is on working with them to prevent a
next potential attack and to continue to prosecute what is an ongoing
war, even though it's not a war that people can typically see and feel
and hear, the way people normally associate with a war, like Desert
Storm, or more recently, like Kosovo. That's where the President is
focused, and I think in the eyes of the American people, properly so.
I think the public wants to see a review of events taking place
prior to September 11th to see if there's anything that can be done to
keep us protected. I think the American people also want to know that
their government at the administration level what it's supposed to be
doing: keeping its eye on the future and making sure we protect the
country, because we still have enemies who want to do us harm.
Q So is that a roundabout way of saying perhaps he wasn't
adequately focused on terrorism, counterterrorism prior to September
11th, but he is now?
MR. FLEISCHER: Just the opposite, John. Just the opposite.
Q Ari, you mentioned that there's a flurry of diplomatic
activity surrounding the Middle East. Why? What does the President
want to come out of all of these meetings?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President hopes that as a result of the visits
by his officials into the region, and the visit by President Mubarak
and the visit by Prime Minister Sharon, following also the visit that
just took place of King Abdullah of Jordan and the Crown Prince of
Saudi Arabia, that the Israelis and the Palestinians will find a
hospitable environment to begin to make serious and concrete progress
on the creation of two states, of Israel and a Palestine, that can live
side by side in security, that protects the rights of the Palestinian
people and the Israeli people. That's the goal.
Q That's the big goal but --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q -- in terms of the short-term goal, the purpose of these
meetings, what does he want to come out of them?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the short-term goal is to figure out the way
to get to the long-term goal. And I don't think anybody has any one
magic answer. If they did, I think peace would have been brought to
the Middle East a long time ago.
In the immediate term, one of the goals, of course, is the
diminution of violence, the creation of an environment in which both
parties feel more comfortable talking to each other, because Yasser
Arafat is no longer under siege in his headquarters in Ramallah, the
Israeli people don't feel under siege because it's impossible to go out
on the street without being worried about a suicide bomber taking their
lives or the lives of their children. So the diminution of the
violence is, first and foremost, a major concern.
Second is finding avenues to make progress on the political front.
Sometimes those can be incremental, sometimes those can be greater.
And the President is going to be very interested in seeing the pace the
parties can establish in helping to support as advanced a pace as
possible.
Q Now, Mubarak is talking about some kind of timetable. Does
the U.S. have anything like that? Do you have -- has the U.S. got
any proposal of its own --
MR. FLEISCHER: Too soon to say. That's kind of what Scott was
asking about earlier. I think that you have to let President Mubarak
come here, and if he has a timetable -- and I don't know that he does
or doesn't -- if he has a timetable, he'll discuss it with the
President and the President will offer his reflections about it. There
will be a --
Q But the White House doesn't have any of its own -- any
proposal of its own, any specific ideas --
MR. FLEISCHER: Right now, again, the President is very much doing
what I indicated earlier, listening to the parties that have a stake in
this, whose outcome and whose input is vital to the outcome -- listen
to them, because one of the lessons is to listen to those parties to
help create an environment for the Israelis and Palestinians, to have
support for whatever they decide. And that's the process.
I invite you to Camp David Saturday morning to attend a press
conference. We will wake you up early, put you on buses. I think it's
a pool event, so for those of you who -- if you are the Saturday
pool, Jean, you are cordially invited. We would be delighted to have
you get up at about 5:00 a.m. to make your bus up to Camp David.
Q Ari, does the President agree with the conclusions in this
report from the U.N. that humans are responsible for global warming?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, the President addressed a little bit of
that in his remarks today. But the President has come out with a
proposal on global warming, because global warming is a serious issue
and the President views it as such. What he has said about it is that
-- and this is consistent with what the President has said and this
recent report that came out and that the United States submitted to the
United Nations, that there is "considerable uncertainty" -- that's in
this recent report -- relating to the science of climate change. This
report submitted to the United Nations also recognizes that any
"definitive prediction of potential outcomes is not yet feasible" and
that, "one of the weakest links in our knowledge is the connection
between global and regional predictions of climate change."
The President has outlined a new approach with a plan to
significantly reduce the growth in greenhouse gas emissions while
sustaining economic growth needed to invest in new technologies to make
our environment cleaner, and invest in science to better understand the
challenges presented by climate change. The President's budget for
fiscal year '03 provides $4.5 billion in funding for climate change,
with a substantial amount of funds dedicated to research, to reduce
scientific uncertainties related to climate change.
So this is an issue the President has put his finger on previously,
has announced a plan that will begin to address many of these problems
without wrecking the American economy.
Q Ari, can I follow that? The President said -- I read the
report of the bureaucracy. Was he referring to the EPA?
MR. FLEISCHER: This is a report that came out of the EPA.
Q Now, let me get to another question. Mr. Bush has said that
it's clear the FBI and CIA were not communicating adequately. He has
said that he's seen no evidence that the attacks of September 11th were
about to occur. But, of course, part of intelligence -- the bulk of
intelligence is connecting the dots. In the whole, does he believe
that the nation's intelligence agencies were doing their jobs
adequately prior to September 11th?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, he does, Wendell. And the President believes
that what's so important now is to focus on the future. And the
President has full faith and confidence in the people who are serving
this nation very well. One of the reasons he wanted to go up to the
National Security Agency today is to say thank you, to say thank you to
the people who were working overtime, who are working extraordinarily
long hours and hard hours, spending a lot of time away from their
families, with the whole purpose of protecting our country. They saw
what took place on September 11th, as well. And as the President has
said, if we had information prior to September 11th that could have
allowed us to stop this attack, does anybody possibly think there is
anybody in the government who would not have wanted -- that would not
have acted to stop the attack?
Q But we did, it's clear we did. We had many, many disparate
pieces of information, which if put together, could have stopped the
attacks. It is now clear, we had any number of bits of information, we
just didn't put them together. The job of intelligence is to put the
stuff together. So how is it he feels the agencies were doing their
jobs adequately?
MR. FLEISCHER: Wendell, as has been said now, even as we now have
regrouped and are reforming and have made changes, we are still a
nation at war. And we are going to always do our best to stop any
potential attack. But, you know, we are also up against a wily enemy
who, in the case of September 11th, as you know, many of the people who
committed the acts of the hijackings didn't even know what their
mission was going to be on that day. So I think, again, people can
look back with 20/20 hindsight, people can look back and second-guess;
this President is focused on the future, as well.
Q Ari, thank you. What is your assessment now of the prospects
for nuclear war between India and Pakistan? And does the U.S., Russia,
China have enough leverage to use on these countries to dissuade them?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the situation remains tense, the situation
remains delicate and our diplomacy is ongoing. Secretary Armitage is
leaving today for India and Pakistan; there will be meetings on the 6th
and on the 7th of this month. And President Putin has recently held
meetings. As you know, the Europeans held meetings; Jack Straw of
Britain held meetings. There will be -- I think you are continuing
to see a worldwide effort to use diplomacy to reduce the tension in the
region, and that's going to be ongoing.
These problems have been with the region for decades; they were
with us and particularly sensitive and delicate moment several months
ago. People thought at the same time violence may have erupted, war
may have erupted. It was successfully handled through diplomacy then,
and that's the President's goal, to do it once more.
Q Meetings are one thing, but what about leverage? Is there
anything we can do, other than talk?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the most important thing is India and
Pakistan, they don't need leverage to recognize that war would be bad
for both of them. Diplomacy is not always about leverage. Often,
diplomacy is about logic; diplomacy is often about helping, by a third
party's presence giving two parties who might otherwise disagree with
each other a way out. And that's the essence of diplomacy.
Q Ari, both you -- the President has said several times that
he is disappointed in Yasser Arafat. At the moment, is he still as
disappointed? Is he slightly more encouraged? Is there any change in
his feeling toward Mr. Arafat since his release from Ramallah?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think the President is still watching. The
President is less focused on any one individual or any one name, and
more focused on the fundamental changes that have to be made to serve
the Palestinian people and to serve the cause of peace in the region.
And those changes are along the lines of security changes, economic
changes, the very things that a people who are deserving of a nation
should have, because it's good for their future.
And any government, whether it's an authority or a state, needs to
be mindful of the items that are of concern to their people. They
represent their people. And the President is focused on those results,
because that's the best way to bring long-term peace to the region.
Q So at the moment, no plans to meet with Mr. Arafat?
MR. FLEISCHER: No.
Q On an unrelated question, but following up on Kelly, since the
President only things one committee should be doing these hearings, if
other committees like Judiciary persist in holding hearings, will,
nevertheless, the President tell people like Director Tenet and Mueller
to go --
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, that was Kelly's question and I think I
answered it.
Q No, no, no. Ari, no, no. I'm asking, if they persist in
holding hearings, will Tenet and Muller testify?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, what I said to Kelly was other committees
have jurisdiction as part of their budget, as part of normal
oversight. The fact that there is one committee looking into events
prior to 9/11 does not excuse other committees from exercising their
ongoing jurisdiction over the matters of the government. But only one
committee is doing the investigation.
Q Are you sending a warning then? Is this --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's the answer.
Q Ari, a day or two after President Bush left Russia, President
Putin announced that he was going to get involved in trying to mediate
the India-Pakistan dispute. Was that discussion --
MR. FLEISCHER: Actually, not quite. It was discussed by the two
Presidents, yes. That was a previously planned conference that was
held in that region that brought together numerous Asian nations,
including India and Pakistan. And President Putin discussed it with
President Bush and President Bush told him he was grateful for Russia's
ongoing diplomacy in the area.
It's another sign of a constructive relationship with Russia, in
which the issues we see similarly are increasing. That's part of the
rejection of the old zero-sum game, where if there was turmoil for one
superpower, it was good for the other. Those days are over, and
President Putin's help is noted.
Q Is there any -- is there any indication that Putin might be
able to help in the Middle East?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, again, there I think you had a conference
immediately taking place of the Asian nations. But if you recall the
group that Secretary Powell met with when he went out to the region was
called the Quartet. And the Quartet involved the European Union, the
United States, Russia and the U.N. -- thank you. Those are the four
members, and Russia is part of the Quartet.
Q Ari, representatives of Arab leaders who have been talking
with President Bush say that they've been left with the impression that
the U.S. is soon going to introduce its own very specific peace plan.
Is that true? And also, why aren't the Enron documents that have been
subpoenaed by Lieberman's committee being released to the public?
MR. FLEISCHER: Okay. One, on the question of any peace plan,
again, or specific plan, let me refer you back to what I just said
earlier about that specific question. The President is going to
continue having the meetings that he's having with President Mubarak,
with Prime Minister Sharon. He will continue to listen. He will
welcome back to the United States and hear the report of Director Tenet
and Secretary Burns, and we'll keep you noted.
As for the documents with Senator Lieberman, in an effort to make
information available as soon as possible and to work with the
Congress, we invited the committee staff to the White House to review
1,745 pages of documents yesterday afternoon before we -- and Senator
Lieberman's committee accepted that. The Office of the Vice President
has made 436
pages available. That's not included in the 1,745 that I just
mentioned.
So we will continue to work with the committee, cooperatively with
the committee, but also sometimes, if these investigations are to be
taken seriously, they need to do their work diligently, and they need
to work with the administration and not turn everything into a news
release. We've seen investigations by news release before, and often
those investigations aren't quite serious.
Q Is there a reason why those documents can't be open to the
public to look at if they're interested?
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me give you some specifics that we're working
with the committee on that does involve information that should not be
made public. Much of the information they're seeking, when it comes to
White House documents, have people's Social Security numbers on them,
have people's emails on them. They have information that does need to
be treated the same way information has traditionally been treated
between the executive and the legislature, when it is provided from the
executive to the legislature. Those are some protocols we are working
to establish with Senator Lieberman.
Senator Lieberman has not yet agreed to all those protocols, and so
there are continued discussions underway with Senator Lieberman. And I
anticipate that those -- we'll just see what happens in those
discussions.
Q What about what the Department of Energy did, which was erase
the embarrassing personal information and --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I didn't say it was embarrassing, it's a
Social Security number. (Laughter.) That's why we're talking to
Senator Lieberman, and that's why the talks, from the White House's
point of view, are in good faith, and we hope that they will be
received in good faith.
Q Ari, Senator Lieberman's staff has said that allowing them to
come over and view them is just a stall tactic, and it's really
completely insufficient, from their point of view. What would you say
to them?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I think we are complying and working very
hard to work with the committee on an issue where, again, the question
is -- I hope the question from the committee is focused on any prior
knowledge about Enron's bankruptcy, and communications with Enron where
information about bankruptcy could have been conveyed, and not an
open-ended fishing expedition about any contact with anybody at Enron
for any reason. Those are the type of open-ended fishing expeditions I
think the American people have seen before and have grown tired of. So
these things are a two-way street, and we'll continue to work with the
Senate on it.
Sarah.
Q Gracias. My question is related to Connie's. Both sides,
India and Pakistan, are still refusing to meet face to face. Does the
President believe that by sending Armitage and Rumsfeld to India and
Pakistan, war there can be avoided?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President does believe that that can be the
case, and that's exactly why the President has been do deeply involved
in the ongoing diplomacy. And that's why other nations of the world
have been involved in the diplomacy. War would be -- could be
catastrophic if it takes place between India and Pakistan, but war is
not inevitable. And that is why the United States has been working so
hard to work with the parties to convince them that war is not in their
interests, let alone the region's or the world's.
Q Why is it acceptable for the IRS to profile millions of
American taxpayers, but not acceptable for federalized airport security
to profile Muslim males between 17 and 45 visiting from terrorist
nations, with one-way tickets and little luggage, when even liberal
Democrat Senator Feinstein says this hurts the effort to track down
terrorists?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I'm not sure what you're referring to on the
predicate of your question with the IRS. But I can assure you, as
somebody who just traveled commercial over the weekend, I had my shoes
removed and I think many Americans of all backgrounds, when they go
through these airports they recognize that the security people are
working very hard and inspecting many people. And most of the people I
know said "thank you" to them because these people have a hard job, and
they're doing it regardless of what the nature of the passenger is.
Q The President's sister, Dorothy -- who I think you know --
was in the Washington Cathedral on Saturday when the preacher, the
Reverend William Sloan Coffin, declared that the axis of evil is not
Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, but what he termed "environmental
degradation, pandemic poverty, and a world awash with weapons."
And my question is, is the President aware that this renowned peace
activist, Coffin, was reported on September the 26th, 1980, by the New
York Post as being charged in court by his wife, Harriet, with having
assaulted her with "a karate chop", and he was trained in all of that
in the CIA? Is the President aware of that?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have no idea.
Q Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.
END 2:13 P.M. EDT
|