For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
November 18, 2002
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
12:50 P.M. EST
MR. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon. Let me just start off with a world
leader phone call the President had this morning. The President spoke
to -- the President and Prime Minister Rasmussen had a warm and
constructive call reflecting the close relationship that exists between
the President and the Prime Minister.
The President congratulated the Prime Minister on his leadership in
advancing the European Union accession process to its culmination at
the Copenhagen summit in December. Both expressed pleasure at the
prospect of a successful NATO summit this week. And both leaders
agreed on the historic and strategic importance of advancing Turkey's
evolution toward the European Union and the importance of the
Copenhagen summit in that regard.
The President congratulated the Prime Minister for the European
Union's having reached agreement with Russia on November 11th
concerning Russia's Kaliningrad region. Both leaders agreed on the
importance of maintaining strong international pressure on Iraq to give
up all weapons of mass destruction and fully comply with its
requirements under the United Nations Security Council.
The President, following that phone call, had his briefings this
morning. He participated in a round table with selected European print
journalists on his upcoming trip, then he met with the Prime Minister
of Lebanon. It was a positive, constructive meeting. The President
emphasized the importance of Lebanon working with the IMF on a
sustainable program. The President told Prime Minister Hariri that
Assistant Secretary Burns would be attending the meeting in Paris.
They also discussed the Middle East peace process. And the
President expressed his strong commitment to continuing our efforts to
implement the road map he outlined on June 24th.
This afternoon the President will participate in some television
interviews with selected European journalists, to continue previewing
his upcoming trip. And then he participates this afternoon in a photo
opportunity with the Nobel laureates -- the United States Nobel
laureates from 2002 and at a reception following that. That will be
press pool coverage this afternoon. With that, I am happy to take your
questions.
Q These continued missile firings in the no-fly zones, taken in
toto, could they constitute a material breach that was serious enough
for us to take it to the U.N.? Or do we want to see material breach in
the area of weapons?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, John, the goal here with the new
strong resolution out of the United Nations is disarmament. However,
within that resolution, it makes very clear that Iraq needs to stop
hostile acts against members who are carrying out previous U.N.
resolutions and the --
Q Sure, which is why I asked the question.
MR. McCLELLAN: Right. And the United States -- the United States
believes that firing upon our aircraft in the no-fly zone or British
aircraft is a violation, it is a material breach. And what that --
what the U.N. resolution allows us to do is it gives us the option, if
we choose, to take that to the Security Council.
But make no mistake about it, our aircraft will continue to respond
accordingly when fired upon in the no-fly zone.
Q Understood. But if they continue to fire on us in the no-fly
zones, will we take that, in toto, to be a pattern of obstruction or
misbehavior that we'll consider taking to the U.N.? Or do we want to
see a material breach on the weapons inspection front before we go to
the U.N.? Are we willing to tolerate these firings?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I emphasized -- no, we're not. I mean,
we will respond accordingly. But we reserve that option of taking that
to the Security Council when it comes to our aircraft in no-fly zones.
But the issue here is disarmament, and this goes to the heart of the
intentions of Saddam Hussein and his regime. Is he going to comply and
cooperate with all the United Nations Security Council resolutions as
called for under the resolution.
Q But, Scott, it seems that, if we're taking the President at
his word, zero tolerance means zero tolerance, and this is a material
breach. Why isn't the administration exercising the option to return
to the U.N. and say, this thing is over before it starts? Or is there
a point of view that, okay, we have to make some kind of threshold
judgments about when we're going to throw in the towel?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I think that's something that we will assess
and review and use that option as available to us if we so choose to
pursue it with the Security Council. But --
Q Why not pursue that if there's already a material breach?
MR. McCLELLAN: It goes back to what I emphasized. The ultimate
issue here is the disarmament of weapons of mass destruction by Saddam
Hussein. I continue to emphasize our policy is one of zero tolerance
when it comes to disarmament, and that's what we will continue to
pursue.
Q Can I just follow up on one other point? Has the government
concluded that it is Osama bin Laden in that audio tape now?
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes. Well, let me make that with one caveat. The
intelligence experts have -- the intelligence experts do believe that
it is -- that the tape is genuine. It cannot be stated with 100
percent certainty, and it is clear that the tape was made in the last
several weeks as well. But, again, I emphasize that they can't make a
100 percent conclusion there, but they do believe it is. And, again,
it's a reminder that we are at war on terrorism. It's a reminder that
we need to continue doing everything we can to go after these terrorist
networks and their leaders wherever they are, and we will.
Q Is this going to be hard -- make it harder for the President
to keep a focus on Iraq when he goes to Prague, the fact that we now
know this was bin Laden and there were new threats issued against
European countries?
MR. McCLELLAN: Actually, part of the discussion in Prague is going
to center on transforming NATO to meet the new threats of the 21st
century. And those threats come in different forms. They come from
outlaw groups and outlaw regimes. And we will continue to do
everything we can when it comes to both to protect the American
people.
And what was the final part of your question there, Tom?
Q Well, there were new threats made against our allies, many of
whom will be in Prague.
MR. McCLELLAN: That's right.
Q Won't it be hard for the President to keep the focus on Iraq
and not have to explain, well, why aren't we looking -- why are we
looking at Iraq now which is not as immediate threat as perhaps some of
these new bin Laden warnings which many European countries are very
concerned about. There has been an increase in alert warnings in
different European capitals.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the President's highest priority remains the
protection of the American people and winning the war on terrorism.
But when we talk about protecting the American people, there are new
threats in the 21st century that we have to address. And as we've
pointed out, we believe that the threat posed by the regime in Iraq is
a continuation of the war on terrorism. But as we've also pointed out,
the President begins every day focused on the war on terrorism. And
we're going to continue to working with the more than 90 countries that
are in a coalition working to wage and win this war against terrorism
and bring these people to justice, wherever they are.
Q Scott, now that the weapons inspectors are on the ground in
Baghdad, the next established date is December the 8th, when Saddam has
to come up with a list of his weapons of mass destruction. Yet, he
continues to say that he has no weapons of mass destruction. There
seems to be a standoff. What happens on December 8th if he doesn't
produce a list?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, this is getting into ifs and hypotheticals.
He has until December 8th. It makes clear in the resolution that false
statements or omissions constitute a material breach. And then you
mentioned the inspectors -- keep in mind that the inspectors are a
means to disarmament. This is about disarmament. This is not about
the inspectors. And this is about disarming Saddam Hussein of his
weapons of mass destruction. Let me go back here, Helen.
Q Yes. You were going to get, I hope, some reaction from the
President on the new Woodward book. And also the Iraqis are saying
that you're not just hitting radar targets or whatever, you're hitting
civilians in villages, every night. We're bombing them every night
now.
MR. McCLELLAN: I think that regime says a lot of things. Much of
it we know in the past has not been true.
Q You never have reporters on the scene. You never -- how do
we know you're not hitting civilians in Iraq and so forth? And why the
step-up bombing? You want a pretext?
MR. McCLELLAN: If you look at the history, it's Saddam Hussein, --
the one that has repressed innocent people --
Q That's not the answer to the question. You've already
established that.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- the United States military goes out of its way
to target only military operations.
Q Do you deny any civilians have been killed?
MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, I would refer you to the Department of
Defense. That's not information that we discuss or that I have before
me at this point.
Q How about the reaction to the book?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it's what I expressed earlier. I haven't
read the book. The President has not read the book. From reading the
excerpts, it appears to offer some interesting perspectives on recent
history. And as time goes by and as we continue to reflect on history,
I'm sure there are going to be a lot of other perspectives and insights
offered, as well.
Q Well, is it true or not? I mean, this is a very simple
question.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm not up here to do book reviews. I'll
leave that to others that do that as a profession.
Q Well, you've got the inside information right here.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we can sit here and talk about a lot -- there
have been other books written. There's been books written by one of
our own correspondents here at the White House, as well. I'm just not
going to sit up here and do book reviews or promote books.
Q He had access, total access to the administration, didn't
he?
MR. McCLELLAN: We did work with him on this book.
Q Okay. Then wouldn't you imagine that he's reflecting exactly
what goes on?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there are a lot of people that I imagine he
talked to. And I can't speak to the accuracy of every conversation or
everything there.
Q Is that how you get access? If you're writing a book you can
get that? (Laughter.) I'm writing a book.
You just said that false starts or omissions constitute material
breach, and Secretary Powell and others have said that. How can -- is
the United States prepared to prove that? How do we know if Iraq says
they're clean, they destroyed everything in the past four years --
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's let the deadline -- let's see what they do
with the deadline. And then we'll be prepared to discuss it further at
that point. But there are specific deadlines spelled out in the
resolution. The next one being December 8th for Iraq to report what
programs or weapons it does have. And we'll see what they report.
Q Inspectors are saying that they would need to disprove, on
the ground, any claim by Iraq that it has no weapons of mass
destruction. In other words, they would have to go inspect. Would the
United States want to see inspections as a way of disproving an Iraqi
claim? Or are you going to bring out -- are you prepared to prove it
otherwise?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think we're jumping a little bit ahead here.
Let's let -- see what happens December 8th, see what's reported and
then we'll go from there. But our position is very clear, and our
position is also one of zero tolerance. They need to state the facts
and report the facts to the Security Council. If they don't, then
that's a violation. That is a material breach --
Q But how do the facts get established?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and then we go back to the Security Council.
Q How do the facts get established?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, let's let this take place. Let's not
jump ahead of where we are at this point. And then we'll have more to
say at that point.
Q We're not jumping ahead. They're moving, they're on the
ground now.
MR. McCLELLAN: Hold on one second. Terry, you had a follow-up, I
think.
Q Well, it's on a different subject. If you come back to me.
MR. McCLELLAN: Okay.
Q On the same subject, in light of the scenario that you've
just outlined, how are we to understand Secretary Rumsfeld's comments
this weekend that we are looking for a pattern of behavior with the
inspections?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not sure which specific comments you're talking
about. I'll be glad to go back and look at them.
Q In other words, zero tolerance suggests that the very first
inkling of any omission or untruth on Iraq's part is adequate to use
force. But a pattern of behavior suggests that you're looking for a
few violations that add up to --
MR. McCLELLAN: Without commenting directly on some comments I have
not seen, we have been very clear in stating that our view is zero
tolerance, that Saddam Hussein does not need to be playing games at
this point. No cat and mouse. It is time for him to comply and
cooperate and disarm. This is about disarmament. And for too long,
for 16 resolutions, for 11 years, Saddam Hussein has defied these
resolutions. And it is now time for him to come into compliance once
-- one final opportunity. That's what this is. And the President's
view is very clear: zero tolerance when it comes to the resolution.
Q I actually have a second question, but I'll defer to Terry,
if he wants --
MR. McCLELLAN: Back to Terry. Back to the first row, and then I
need to keep moving so I can get back to the other rows.
Q On the question I asked this morning, do you have anything on
the new Israeli construction -- expansion of settlements or new
construction, depending on your point of view? And especially the
Prime Minister Sharon statements that seem to encourage and endorse
that new settlement activity?
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, Terry, our view is well known, long-standing
and unchanged when it comes to expansion of settlements.
Q The President has nothing new to say about this particular
statement by the Prime Minister of Israel, that these settlements are
going to expand?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think our views are well-known and we are
going to continue, as the President emphasized with Prime Minister
Hariri earlier today, continue working to implement the road map and
get to the ultimate goal of two states living side by side in peace.
And we will not lose sight of that goal. And we will continue working
to implement that road map.
Q But, the President isn't really involved. He's leaving this
to lower-tier diplomats, and this is an issue which --
MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree. He's fully --
Q Jimmy Carter is going to be here this afternoon; Presidential
leadership has tended to be required.
MR. McCLELLAN: And the President has been a leader. He's provided
leadership throughout, and he remains very engaged in this issue and
will continue to remain engaged in this issue. It's too important --
too important to ultimate peace.
Q What are these well-known views on the settlements? Either
you approve of them, or you don't.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we've said that we are opposed to the
expansion of existing settlements. We've made that clear in the past.
Q In his conversation this morning with Prime Minister
Rasmussen, did the President discuss the dispute between Denmark and
Russia over the extradition of the Chechen leader?
MR. McCLELLAN: I was not informed about that. It was about a
10-minute phone call, and I gave you a pretty good readout of what they
did discuss.
Q So you don't know if the President took a position on that
dispute?
MR. McCLELLAN: I was not informed about it. Goyle, and then --
we're trying to jump around.
Q Two questions. One, Osama bin Laden dead or alive, where
about, and all that. Now Democrats on Capitol Hill, including Senator
Bob Graham, they are criticizing the administration for not finding
him, and they believe that he's still alive. And at the same time,
according to Al-Jazeera correspondent in Islamabad, the tape about him
was handed over to him in Islamabad in Pakistan.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, which tape?
Q The tape on Osama bin Laden, audiotape was handed over to him
in the Al-Jazeera correspondent in Islamabad.
MR. McCLELLAN: Right. On the first part of your question about
regarding the war on terrorism, we continue to make great progress on
the war on terrorism. The President spoke about this in his radio
address, as well, about the productive week we had not only on securing
the homeland, but in working with our coalition of 90-some countries to
track down these terrorists wherever they are and bring them to
justice, or bring justice to them, as it may be.
So we continue to make good progress there. It will be a long,
difficult war, as the President has indicated from the get-go. But we
will not tire in our pursuit, and we will continue to pursue these
people, these people who seek to harm America, our friends and our
allies, wherever they are.
Q A local question. Indian-Americans are complaining that this
time the administration of President Bush, he has not issued any
statement on the 1 billion Indians celebrated -- the Festival of
Lights, including 2 million in this country. No message from the White
House. And, second, the Republican Party, just before elections in
Tennessee -- Nashville, Tennessee -- they distributed some flyers which
were anti-Hindu and anti-Buddhist in order to win the election.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, which one do you want me to -- the first
one, and then we're going to move on. I can check to see if any
messages have been sent. There are many forms in which that can come.
So I'll just have to check on that.
Q If the policy in Iraq is zero tolerance, and you believe that
these no-fly zone incidents could be material breaches, are you sending
the wrong message to Iraq that might be confused so that they believe
the U.S. zero tolerance policy really isn't a zero tolerance policy?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, actually, if you go back, those no-fly zones
are enforcing previous resolutions to protect innocent people living in
those areas from someone who has shown his willingness to repress them
and attack them. But, no, I disagree with that. This is part of
Saddam Hussein finally showing that he is not going to play any games,
that he will comply and cooperate and work toward disarmament. So this
goes to showing his intentions. And that's very important as we move
forward.
Q But are you sending a mixed message to Iraq by saying, we
have a zero tolerance policy, and yet you now have three or four
different no-fly zone violations from the U.S. point of view?
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think our message could be any clearer to
the regime in Iraq and to Saddam Hussein.
Q Why is the message not that the firing in the no-fly zone is
a relatively minor thing? Given not only that you do not pursue a
material breach violation of the Security Council resolution, but the
knowledge that our pilots use them as training missions, why should we
not see the attacks in the no-fly zone as being more valuable to us
than taking the violation to the U.N. Security Council?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, be more valuable to us?
Q We would rather respond militarily than take it to the U.N.
Security Council. It is more valuable for us to target the air
defenses, to do the firing, to fly the missions, than go to the U.N.
Security Council. So why should we consider the Iraqi firing on U.S.
and British warplanes threatening at all? They haven't hit any. We
don't expect them to hit any, and we're not concerned enough about it
to take it to the U.N.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the first part of your question, we do
respond accordingly. Second part, the U.N. resolution says, and in
paragraph 8 it spells out, as part of this strong new resolution it
says they need to not take hostile action against members enforcing
previous resolutions. We take this resolution by the Security Council
very seriously, and this is the United Nations Security Council showing
that it is relevant, that it is not going to put up with any more
games. And so --
Q I know, but that's not what I'm saying, Scott. We take the
resolution seriously, but we don't take the actions seriously. They're
not threatening to us in any way --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, any time someone fires on our aircraft we
take it seriously. And we will respond accordingly, as we have been,
and we will continue, as we've indicated, to reserve that option to
take it to the Security Council. Again, it goes to his intentions to
comply and to demonstrate that he will comply and cooperate.
Q You say your views on settlements, Israel settlements, are
well-known, and they may well be, but they don't seem to be carrying
much influence with the Israeli government. Is the President prepared
to do anything to put some muscle behind those well-known views and to
try to make those views have some traction with the Israeli
government? And if the answer is no, why should we or anybody else
take those well-known views seriously?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we continue to work with all parties in the
region, and we will continue to work with all parties in the region on
the President's road map. This is, as I emphasized, an important
priority for the President, the Middle East peace process.
Q Is the President prepared to do anything specifically to
pressure the Israeli government to pull back from a policy which you
have said, once again, seems to conflict with American policy?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, as we move forward we will continue to keep
you updated on what we are doing. We remain fully engaged in the
region, though.
Q It sounds like the answer is, no.
MR. McCLELLAN: Alex.
Q By saying you're going to wait until December 7th -- December
8th for that deadline, are you ruling out then the possibility? I
mean, you said you have this option of citing material breach for the
no-fly zone, but then you're saying you're going to wait until December
8th to see how he complies with the disarmament or the declaration of
weapons?
MR. McCLELLAN: With his disclosure of weapons of mass destruction
programs and --
Q Right. So are you saying you will at least wait until
December 8th on the issue of the no-fly zone, whether that constitutes
a material breach?
MR. McCLELLAN: I wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion. But
there are different issues within the same resolution.
Q Scott, what kind of support would the President like to see
from the NATO allies on Iraq? A statement of support, we'd like to see
pledges of military support, both?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it was expressed. We may see that. I'm
sure it will be discussed, but again, the primary purpose of the NATO
summit is to talk about enlargement, robust enlargement around NATO,
transforming NATO to meet the threats of the 21st century, and the new
relationships that we have with countries like Russia. So that's the
primary purpose. Let's let the meetings take place and then we'll go
from there.
Q What I'm getting at is if one of the purposes of the new NATO
is to face threats of the 21st century, and the President has
identified Iraq as one of those principal threats, why is he not asking
the Alliance to formally commit to military action to enforce what he
thinks needs to be enforced?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, let's let the meetings take place. I think
that NATO countries understand the importance of disarming Saddam
Hussein and disarming the regime in Iraq.
Q Scott, on CNN and reported by The New York Times yesterday,
new House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said, "I'm a liberal Democrat,
but I'm a conservative Catholic." But attorney William Donahue of the
Catholic League announced yesterday, he noted the record that Mrs.
Pelosi supports partial birth abortion, and he said, "Pelosi's spin
game is insulting, no conservative Catholic we know okays the killing
of kids 80 percent born." I know the President is very deeply concerned
about this, so could you tell us, does the President agree with Mr.
Donahue, or does he agree with Mrs. Pelosi's claim?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, the President's views on
partial birth abortion are well-known, and he believes we need to end
it. Second of all --
Q He doesn't think she can be a conservative Catholic and be in
favor of partial birth abortion, does he?
MR. McCLELLAN: Second of all, Les, the President looks forward to
working with all the new leaders in the upcoming Congress. He believes
that the elections made a clear statement, that we need to work
together to get things done. And I would remind you that there is an
important vote coming up in the Senate tomorrow on the bill to create
the Department of Homeland Security. And we urge the Senate to move
forward quickly and get that to the President's desk.
Q All right. The Arizona Daily Star reports that Cochise
County's newspaper has issued a call to arms and is spearheading the
formation of a local militia to combat illegal immigration. And my
question is, does the President plan to do anything more than is being
done by federal authorities, which is not stopping so many thousands of
illegals from getting across the border?
MR. McCLELLAN: We have taken a number of steps to secure our
borders while keeping in mind the importance that America was founded
on the tradition of welcoming immigrants to the country.
Q Not illegal, though -- not illegal immigrants.
MR. McCLELLAN: And the important security legislation just
recently passed in the House. So we're taking a number of steps to
continue securing our borders.
Connie.
Q Thank you. Scott, the White House is participating in a
forum about end-of-life care, which is going on right now. And there's
just been an address by the head of the faith-based initiative office.
Does the Bush administration still believe it's wrong for Oregon and
other parties to permit physician-assisted suicide for the terminally
ill?
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes.
Q Are you still going to challenge or are you still challenging
Oregon --
MR. McCLELLAN: I believe that's still being pursued and there's
some legal decisions going on in that realm. I don't have the latest
update on that, but our position is very clear on that, as well.
Q Scott, will the President shake Chancellor Schroeder's hand
in Germany -- I mean, in Prague?
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't see why not. I saw the suggestion. Look,
the relationship with Germany is an important one, and we'll continue
to work together on our shared goals.
Q Will he then meet one-on-one with him?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, there is no meeting scheduled. As we
indicated, there are a limited number of bilaterals that are happening,
and he doesn't get to meet with all the leaders at every one of these
summits.
Q Scott, Tony Garza is ready to go to Mexico to be ambassador
from the United States. The Mexican authorities continue to take
immigration as a first priority for the bilateral relation, and they
think with the personal relationship that Tony has with the President
they can get something done quickly. It is fair for the Mexican
government to think in that way, or just --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, certainly, a safe, orderly, humane migration
remains a priority for this administration. And we remain committed to
working with Mexico through our high-level working groups to move
forward on those issues related to a safe, orderly and humane
migration. And I would point out that Ambassador Garza has a long
history of working on these issues and working closely with Mexico.
Q For instance, would the President help the goal of the
Mexican government?
MR. McCLELLAN: To help what?
Q To get the goal of the Mexican government, his friendship
with the President would help in any way to the goal of immigration?
MR. McCLELLAN: Sure, he'll be a help to that. The President has a
strong relationship with Mexico and with President Fox. And Ambassador
Garza will play an important role in that relationship.
Q Is the White House saying that, in and of themselves, that
the firing on British and American warplanes, even though that might be
a material breach, would not constitute a cause for war, in and of
themselves?
MR. McCLELLAN: I would just emphasize that we reserve the option
to take that to the Security Council. And again, I would emphasize
that this goes to showing his intention to comply and cooperate. But
in the meantime, our aircraft will respond when fired upon.
Q Scott, when was the President told about the conclusion of
the analysis of the Osama tape?
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know the exact timing. But he was informed
and he's aware of the analysis.
Q Do you know what his reaction was, specifically?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I think the reaction goes back to what he
said last week, as well as what I've said, that the war on terrorism is
about more than one man. It's about some thousands of evildoers,
thousands of terrorists that are operating in some 60 countries, and
going after them and bringing them to justice, hunting them down where
they are. But the tape -- and we said all along no matter who it is --
is a reminder that we are at war on terrorism, that there are real
threats out there. And we take those threats very seriously. And
that's why we've taken steps to ramp-up our protective measures -- both
here at home and abroad.
Q One on the homeland security bill, which you mentioned just a
couple minutes ago. There are some in Congress who think that there
are too many unrelated measures that could be bogging this down. Is
that the White House view?
MR. McCLELLAN: What are you specifically referring to?
Q Well, there are a number of extraneous issues dealing with
pharmaceutical companies and all the rest. Is there concern at the
White House that so many of these attached items could prevent the
action from taking place this session?
MR. McCLELLAN: This remains the highest priority for this lame
duck Congress. The President made that clear. We would hope that
there would not be action taken that could stop this bill from getting
done. We believe that it's making good progress, that it's moving
along. And we're hopeful that the Senate will move forward and pass it
and get it to the President's desk as quickly as possible.
Q Although you're hoping for quick passage of the homeland
security bill, how do you expect to pay for it? How does the
administration plan to address the funding gap? Since, as you know,
the current continuing funding resolution isn't adequate enough to pay
for the cost?
MR. McCLELLAN: And actually, when you go back to the
appropriations bills, the President had a meeting last Friday with
Senator Stevens and Congressman Young. And he urged them to work on
those, get their work done those remaining appropriations bills during
December. And the President emphasized that we are committed to
working with the committees to help them with that work so that we can
fund our important priorities, but at the same time control wasteful
government spending elsewhere. Hold the line on spending. That was
the President's message Friday. Yes, sir.
Q Yes, on the visit of the Prime Minister of Lebanon this
morning. Was there a message from the Syrian President, is there a
kind of dialogue between the United States and Syria through Lebanon to
reconvene Israeli-Syrian negotiations?
MR. McCLELLAN: Let me go back and look at my notes. We'll try to
get you that information, if there is any additional information on
that. The readout I gave you is pretty much what happened in the
meeting. I was in the meeting. I'll look back in my notes and see if
there's any more on that. Yes, sir.
Q Scott, first, Mexico has proposed to lift the sanctions
against Iraq if there were not found any weapons. And now President
Fox has criticized President Bush because he believes maybe he
overreacted in this question of Iraq and the war against terrorism.
How the White House is taking these statements?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm not familiar with the particular
statement you're referring to. But again, I think the President's
views are very important -- are very clear. The United States is
speaking with one voice; the United Nations Security Council is
speaking with one voice -- Mexico included in that -- that Saddam
Hussein must disarm. And that's what we'll continue to pursue.
Q On appropriations, on Friday's meeting, did they talk about
whether the White House wants the appropriators to do these as
individual bills? Or as an omnibus?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I wasn't in the meeting. So I'm not sure
about the specifics within there. But the President's message is, we
need to get them done. Congress needs to get them done. Let's work on
these remaining appropriations bills. He urged Congress to work on
these remaining appropriations during the December so that we can come
back at the beginning of the next session and get the fiscal year '03
appropriation bills passed. There are only two that have passed at
this point. So 11 remain.
Q Did he give them more money to work with?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I think that we have spelled out our views
of where we are and the importance of Congress showing fiscal restraint
when it comes to the budget. We have a lot of important priorities.
And we need to fund those priorities. And the way you do that is to
make sure you hold the line in spending elsewhere.
Q You noted a while ago the American tradition of welcoming
immigrants. Many thousands of those immigrants, of course, have come
from Iraq over the years, have become citizens. Can you confirm that
this administration has undertaken a policy of targeting American
citizens of Iraqi descent for special surveillance or other action in
the run-up to potential war against Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, I'm aware of the news reports
that your question is based on. And I'm not going to get into the
accuracy of those news reports that are based on intelligence matters
because, as you know, we don't speak about -- we don't discuss
intelligence matters from the podium.
So without discussing any particular reports, I would go back and
emphasize that we are going to do everything we can to protect the
American people, but do so in a way that respects our Constitution,
protects people's rights and is based on the law, and within the law.
Yes, go ahead.
Q Well, if I may follow-up on that. It is not intelligence, it
is a policy that would segregate certain American citizens for special
treatment by law enforcement. And essentially, the President's answer
is, trust me with your liberties. Which is fine, he seems like a
trustworthy guy. But that's not the way the system works. The
founding fathers set it up so the President is not the final arbiter of
liberty. And one of the ways of checking potential abuses of power is
the free flow of information. So I ask you, do Iraqi citizens --
American citizens of Iraqi descent have a right to know whether or not
they're being targeted?
MR. McCLELLAN: Let me make a couple of points. One, everything we
do must and will be within the rule of law and within our
Constitution. Everything we do will be consistent with the
Constitution.
Q But how will we know?
MR. McCLELLAN: Hold on -- hold on. Let me make a few points. The
war on terrorism came to our shores on September 11th in a very vivid
and tragic way. Al Qaeda was responsible. We also know that there are
sympathizers out there who also want to harm America. And that's why
I made the point that the President's highest priority is the
protection of the American people, and that we're going to do
everything we can to continue protecting the American people. But we
will do so consistent with our Constitution.
The FBI has investigative guidelines that are based on the law.
They must adhere to the law and the Constitution. And when it comes to
what you referenced, such as surveillance, searches and seizures, there
are strict legal requirements regarding surveillance and searches and
seizures -- requirements that are based on the Constitution and based
on applicable law. And that includes the requirement that agents must
obtain court orders. So the point I made that we are going to do
everything consistent with the Constitution and with the law is based
on those comments.
Q Thank you.
MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you.
END 1:28 P.M. EST
|