For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 2, 2004
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
12:48 P.M. EST
MR. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon. A couple updates to begin with.
Last year, the President proposed the creation of the Millennium
Challenge Account and the Millennium Challenge Corporation. With the
passage of the omnibus spending bill, the President's vision is now
reality.
This initiative represents a major innovation in the way the United
States conducts foreign assistance. The Millennium Challenge Account
will provide aid and assistance to countries that meet performance
standards on political and economic development. And with the MCA, new
funds will be devoted to projects and nations that govern justly,
invest in their people, and encourage economic freedom.
We are grateful to the Congress for passing the Millennium
Challenge Account funding. And today at 4:00 p.m., Secretary Powell
will chair the inaugural meeting of the Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
Now an update to the President's schedule. The President is
currently having lunch with Dr. Kay. This is an opportunity for the
President to hear directly from Dr. Kay and hear about what he has
learned as the former head of the Iraq Survey Group.
And tomorrow, the President looks forward to meeting with United
Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan here at the White House. The two
leaders will discuss a range of issues of mutual concern. The United
Nations has an important role to play in international affairs, and the
President looks forward to his meeting tomorrow with Secretary General
Annan.
Q Time?
MR. McCLELLAN: We'll get you all that information later today.
With that, I'll be glad to go into questions. Steve.
Q Scott, when do you expect the commission's work to be done?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, the President spoke earlier
today and said that he will be announcing the formation of a bipartisan
independent commission to take a broad look at our intelligence
capabilities. We are still working on finalizing everything and
getting all the commission members in place. I do expect the President
will have more to say about that announcement this week, and we'll
certainly keep you posted on the timing of it.
I think in terms of the time line, I would just stress that it is
important that the commission's work is done in a way where it doesn't
become embroiled in partisan politics. We want the commission to be
able to take a broad look at our intelligence capabilities,
particularly relating to the dangerous new threat we face from weapons
of mass destruction and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
That's a very high priority for this administration in the 21st
century. And so the President will have more to say on that soon, but
it's important that they have the time to do a thorough job, looking at
our intelligence capabilities.
Q Scott, on that point, I mean, it's a convenient thing for the
incumbent President to do, which is to basically say, let's set up a
commission, but don't report back to me until after the election. Why
shouldn't this President face the facts of the intelligence-gathering
and the case that he made to go into Iraq, in time, where the results
of such a commission to be laid out to the American people, who are
going to making a decision about whether he should stay in office?
MR. McCLELLAN: David, I think, first of all, the decision to
confront Saddam Hussein was because he was a gathering threat. We made
that very clear. And if you're going to get into talking about
intelligence, let's talk about what we knew. Our intelligence was
based on views shared by -- and intelligence agencies around the world,
and the United Nations. Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat, there
was no debate about the fact that he was a threat.
We knew he had weapons of mass destruction, we knew he had used
chemical weapons on his own people. He had the intention and he had
the capability. Dr. Kay has spoken to that in his testimony before
Congress. He has made it very clear that Saddam Hussein was in clear
violation of his international obligations -- and, in particular,
Security Council Resolution 1441, which was one final opportunity for
Saddam Hussein to come clean or face serious consequences. And we
followed through on serious consequences.
Q Can I just follow up on one point? The President is speaking
very cryptically about this, in terms of why we need such an
examination of pre-war intelligence. Shouldn't the American people
conclude that the only reason to call for such an investigation is
because the President now believes that this administration got it
wrong when it came to assessing the intelligence and the threat that
Saddam Hussein posed?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, David, I think I just pointed out that the
intelligence that we had prior to the war was intelligence that was
shared by agencies around the world --
Q So what? So maybe everybody was wrong. What's the --
MR. McCLELLAN: It was intelligence shared by -- it was shared by
the United Nations. But the bottom line didn't change --
Q What does it matter who had the intelligence --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- the bottom line didn't change.
Q -- if it was bad, it was bad.
MR. McCLELLAN: And the bottom line didn't change: Saddam Hussein
was a dangerous man in a dangerous part of the world and Dr. Kay --
Q You're not answering the question.
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's talk about --
Q Is this an admission that the administration got it wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: Okay, I would like to make my points and I'll
welcome your questions, as well. But let me get --
Q You're not answering the question.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you're not giving me a chance to finish what
I started on, David. Let me continue.
It's important that we look at the facts and what was known. And
it's also important that we -- as the President made clear last week --
that we look at what we learn on the ground and compare that with what
we knew before. The work of the Iraq Survey Group is ongoing at this
point.
But we already know from Dr. Kay, from his testimony, from the
progress report that he oversaw as head of the Iraq Survey Group, that
Saddam Hussein had the intention and had the capability. He was a
threat. He was a gathering threat. And in this day and age, in a
post-September 11th world, it's important that we confront those
threats. And we are doing so in a number of different ways --
Q Then why do we need this commission? If you're so convinced
everything was honky-dory, why do we need a commission?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it's important -- it's important that we
not only look back, but that the commission looks forward to look at
ways we can improve our ability to meet the challenges we face in
confronting the new threat we face from weapons of mass destruction and
the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The security challenges
that we face in the 21st century really present us with new, more
complex and more difficult intelligence challenges.
And we're no longer in a Cold War, where intelligence focused on
large-scale deployed forces. We are now in a war on terrorism. You
have outlaw regimes in secret, closed societies that seek to conceal
their conduct through deception and denial. You have terrorist
organizations, like al Qaeda, who seek to inflict maximum harm on
America, on our friends and on our allies. And that's why the
President believes it is important for there to be a broad assessment
undertaken by an independent and bipartisan commission to look at those
challenges and how we can address those challenges.
Q Why now, Scott? I mean, obviously, this comes at a
particular time in a debate over WMD, why did the President choose this
week to announce this?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, this is something he started looking at early
last week and he directed the White House to begin work on setting up
the commission. Like I said, he's going to be -- he will have more to
say on it very soon, but it's for the reasons I stated, because of the
global security threats that we face in the 21st century and the
challenges that our intelligence community faces in confronting those
threats.
Q Right, that's been --
MR. McCLELLAN: But it should be a broad look at our intelligence.
It will look at Iraq and it's important -- but that -- let me remind
you, that the work of the Iraq Survey Group is ongoing at this point.
It's important for them to gather as many facts as possible so that we
can do a good, full look at what we learn on the ground and compare
that with what we knew before.
Q Well, I understand the broader concerns, and obviously that's
something the President has talked about before. But, obviously, the
President started talking about this, thinking about this a day or two
after David Kay testified on the Hill, several days after he had come
back and given interviews in which he said it appears that there was no
large stockpile of weapons. Obviously, that had to be a factor in the
President's thinking.
MR. McCLELLAN: We are learning more from Dr. Kay. He has now
stepped aside and Charles Duelfer will be taking over for the Iraq
Survey Group. Dr. Kay has pointed out that it's very important for the
Iraq Survey Group to complete its work. Dr. Kay has pointed out that
the intention and capability were there. That means there was a
threat. And he said that it was potentially more dangerous than we
thought prior to the war.
Q It's perfectly clear that you want the Iraq Survey Group to
finish its work. But this does appear to be an implicit
acknowledgement that the President now shares David Kay's view that
we're unlikely to find large stockpiles, and would like to find out
why.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I think Dr. Kay pointed out that there's
still work to be done by the Iraq Survey Group, there's still sites to
go to, people to interview, and that work is ongoing of the Iraq Survey
Group.
Q -- said we were wrong.
MR. McCLELLAN: But I'm not getting into prejudging the Iraq Survey
Group. That work is ongoing at this point. We need to let them gather
all the facts that they can. We need to let them draw as complete a
picture as possible so that we can look at that. But it's important to
look at this in the context of the broader threat we face from weapons
of mass destruction and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Q I understand that. Does the President share David Kay's view
that we're unlikely at this point to find large stockpiles --
MR. McCLELLAN: I can tell you what we believed before the war, and
I've gone through a little bit of that here today. It was what was
believed by intelligence agencies around the world. But what we know
-- what we know is that what we've already learned from Dr. Kay only
reconfirms the fact that Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat and that
it was the right decision to remove his regime from power. But let's
let the Iraq Survey Group complete their work. But we're already
learning more and it's important to look at this in the context of a
broad assessment of these new threats that we face.
Q Scott, you've said on many occasions that we don't know the
full story yet, we have to wait to hear the full story. Intelligence
sources have called David Kay's statements a rush to judgment. They
keep on saying that there's a lot more work by the ISG to do. If there
is, in fact, a lot more for the ISG to do and we don't know the full
story yet, what's the value in launching a commission into the
intelligence at this point?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I just -- one, the President is going to talk
more about this when he announces the commission. But I think he
addressed a little bit of it earlier today, and I've addressed some of
it already here from this podium. We face a number of serious global
security threats in the 21st century, none more important --
Q Don't --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you're asking me why; let me finish here.
But none is more important and more serious than the threat from
weapons of mass destruction and the spread of weapons of mass
destruction. We're no longer in the Cold War era, where intelligence
was focused on those large-scale deployed forces. We are now in the
war on terrorism, and the war on terrorism is a different kind of war
and it's going to be a long war. And that's why we should take a broad
assessment, to look -- not only look back, but look ahead at ways that
we can improve our ability to confront these threats.
Q I've heard that, your point when you made it a little while
ago. I'm just wondering, you keep saying this idea that we don't know
the full story, so how can you examine if there was a problem if you
don't yet know the full story yet. On the other hand, you're saying,
well, let's start examining the potential problems with Iraq, because
that's part of the mandate of this commission, before we know the full
story. So I'm wondering how do you reconcile those two things?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I said that, one, this is a broad
assessment, so you need to keep it in that context. But we are --
Q -- into Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: Let me finish. We're already learning more. We
learned already from the initial progress report of the Iraq Survey
Group that Saddam Hussein was in clear violation of his international
obligations, and that that was a final opportunity to comply or face
serious consequences. But we are learning more. The President right
now is having lunch with Dr. Kay to hear more about what he has learned
since that time. And it's important for the work of the commission to
begin, and as we gather all the facts that we can from the Iraq Survey
Group, they can look at it in that context, as well.
Q Scott, I was just trying to reconcile those two ideas. You
stood here for a week saying, we don't know the whole story, how can we
have an answer if we don't know the whole story. And then you're
striking this commission to look into a story that you say isn't
finished.
MR. McCLELLAN: One, it's a broad -- let me try to help clarify --
Q I understand that you --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, no, let me try to help clarify for you.
Q But Iraq is --
MR. McCLELLAN: It's a broad assessment; that work is ongoing and
it's important that they complete their work, that they draw -- that
the Iraq Survey Group draws as complete a picture as possible. And we
can incorporate all those facts into the commission. But we already
are learning some things, and we already have learned a great deal from
the work of the Iraq Survey Group. There is still a great deal for
them to complete. That's why their work is ongoing. But we can begin
the process of taking this broad look at these threats -- at the
intelligence related to the threats we face in the 21st century,
particularly from weapons of mass destruction and the spread of weapons
of mass destruction.
And so that -- it's important that that work begin.
Q Scott, just to follow up on David's question. The bottom
line on the timing of the report of this commission is that the
American people, when they go to the polls to choose the next President
in November, will not have the answers about what went wrong with the
prewar intelligence and what responsibility, if any, this President and
this administration had in that failure. The President, in essence, in
announcing this commission and expecting it to report after the
election is keeping the voters in the dark.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, again, he's going to have more to say on
this, on the scope and the timing of the commission here soon. But the
American people know that the decision that the President took was the
right decision to confront a gathering threat and remove that threat.
This is --
Q But they don't have all the facts.
MR. McCLELLAN: They have facts already that show that Saddam
Hussein was in clear violation of Security Council Resolution 1441.
We will continue to talk about the threats that we're confronting
in this 21st century and the ways in which we're confronting them.
There are a number of different ways we're confronting threats. That's
why it's important that we have a commission that takes a broad
assessment and looks at the intelligence related to threats we face
from other countries as well.
What we're learning from Libya. That's an important one as well
for the commission to look at.
Q There's no chance of any kind of interim report, of any kind
of update for the American people?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, let's -- the commission hasn't even been
announced officially at this point. We're still working on finalizing
everything that goes into the commission and finalizing the makeup of
the commission. We're going to have more to say when it's announced.
So I wouldn't jump to any conclusions yet, in terms of the scope and
the timing on issues of that nature.
Q Can I ask a question about the broad mandate that you're
describing? Would this include not just a look at how the intelligence
was gathered, what might have been wrong in that or in its analysis,
but in how it was used and how essentially it was sold? In other
words, is the President willing to put himself and his top aides under
the microscope a little bit?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, keep in mind that the -- right off the
bat, that the intelligence was shared by agencies around the world, it
was shared by the United Nations. There was a lot we knew about Saddam
Hussein, there was a lot we knew about his history. And given what we
knew and given the facts of September 11th, we could not afford to rely
on his good intentions. That's why we confronted that threat.
But, again, what's important is for the commission to have full
access to all the information they need to do their job. I'm not going
to get into all the scope, issues at this point, until the commission
is -- everything is finalized and it's announced.
Q So you aren't ruling anything out? This commission could at
the end of the day say, the intelligence was flawed and the Bush
administration made too much --
MR. McCLELLAN: What I'm saying is that we're not announcing the
commission today. We will be in short order -- the President has made
that very clear. And we'll have more to say about it at that point.
Q With thousands dead, would the President feel any personal
remorse that he took this country into war based on false information?
And I have a follow up.
MR. McCLELLAN: Based on the information that we knew Saddam
Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We knew that he had used
chemical weapons on his own people. We knew --
Q But they didn't have -- Hans Blix kept telling you, Scott
Ritter kept telling you --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- we knew that he failed to account for stockpiles
of weapons of mass destruction. He went to great lengths to conceal
and hide his weapons of mass destruction programs. He refused to
comply with his international obligations for 12 years and some 17
resolutions. This was a -- this was a dictator who sought to dominate
the Middle East.
Q Many countries have defied resolutions.
MR. McCLELLAN: This was someone who had mass graves and torture
chambers and rape rooms.
Q Does he feel personally, at all -- does he feel bad about
this?
MR. McCLELLAN: It was the right decision. It was the right
decision to confront Saddam Hussein and remove him from power.
Q I'm asking you, what is his personal reaction to having false
information take us into war?
MR. McCLELLAN: Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat. And what we
have learned today only reconfirms the fact that he was a gathering
threat. The decision that the President made was the right decision,
in the interest of doing everything we can to protect the American
people from the new and dangerous threats that we face in the 21st
century. We know he had the intention, we know he had the capability,
and we acted to remove that threat.
Q My follow up is, will he cooperate with this panel totally
and not stonewall and give the documents and give the notes and so
forth and let people testify?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I said that this commission will have
full access to the information they need to do their job. And we will
have more to say on this when he announces it.
David.
Q A few more on this subject. When you describe the broad
mandate here, can you tell us specifically will they be looking at the
failure to detect Iran's reprocessing -- I'm sorry, their uranium
enrichment capability, the failure to detect the Libyan enrichment
capability? Will they specifically be looking at the Pakistani
scientist? Does the President envision each of those as areas in which
the commission should go deep?
MR. McCLELLAN: In fact, you mentioned some issues that relate to
exactly what I'm talking about, and when I say that this will be a
broad assessment of our intelligence capabilities, particularly related
to weapons of mass destruction and the spread of weapons of mass
destruction. And certainly there is information that we're learning
now from Libya that we did not know, we did not realize that -- how far
along their nuclear capability was. They are now working with us --
Q But that was --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- they are now working with us to eliminate those
programs, and that's important. That happened since our decision to
move on Iraq.
And so it's important --
Q If you won't tell us --
MR. McCLELLAN: That's what I'm saying that --
Q Well, tell us whether you plan for them --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- that the global intelligence challenges that we
face in this age, in this 21st century are new, they're harder, they're
more complex. And that's why we need to take a look -- a look not only
back, but a look forward at ways that we can improve our ability to
confront these threats.
Q Scott, you told us on Libya -- would you give us a sentence
or two about what questions you expect the commission to deal with on
Iran and, particularly --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm going to wait until the announcement is made,
and then you'll have more information on the scope at that point. But
you mentioned some areas that related directly to intelligence and
weapons of mass destruction.
Q So allies are not off the table here? We would look at
Pakistan, as well?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I'm going to wait until the announcement is
made. But it's important that we look broadly at our intelligence
capabilities specifically related to weapons of mass destruction and
the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Q Scott, back on the timing issue. It seems like it's
canceling itself out. One minute the administration said, okay, we're
so concerned about this we're going to do campaign damage control and
have an investigation. And the next minute, now you're saying because
of partisan politics, we're going to wait until after the election. If
it's such an urgency, why not now? The commission can be shielded, why
not give the information --
MR. McCLELLAN: There are some people who have made that same
argument, and they're the same people that have suggested an extension
for the 9/11 commission. It's important that they have the time to do
their work and do it thoroughly.
Q So if they do it thoroughly after the election -- you're
basically sending people to the polls to vote for a President, not
knowing if he went to war --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I don't necessarily agree with that.
Q Wait a --- no, no, no. Well, how are we going to find out
the information until the investigation is conducted?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there's a lot of information that has already
been publicly released. I would point you back to the progress report
by the Iraq Survey Group. Dr. Kay is certainly already talking about
what he has learned even since that time. And the Iraq Survey Group is
going to continue their work, and we want them to complete their work
as soon as they can, but it's important that they have the time to
gather all the facts that they need.
But it's important -- I think you would agree with me, it's
important for, as we look at Iraq, to have all the facts that we can
gather. And Dr. Kay is the one who said --
Q After they gather -- after the election.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- Dr. Kay is the one who said that it's important
for the Iraq Survey Group to complete its work. And Charles Duelfer,
the new head of the Iraq Survey Group, will make decisions on when that
work is complete and the time line on that.
Q But with everything that happened in the last election,
people are saying --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, but I think --
Q Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
MR. McCLELLAN: You're making assumptions about things that may or
may not be known at certain points.
Q You just said -- you just said you don't want partisan
politics. That's after the election, after the 2004 election. So the
American public will go to the polls literally with no information
about what this -- the President's investigative team, what you've come
up with, and they would just go to the polls, blindly voting for a
President --
MR. McCLELLAN: I think that presumes a lot of things I don't
necessarily agree with.
Q Scott, what does the administration hope that this commission
will do that is different from what the six other panels currently
investigating prewar U.S. intelligence on Iraq and WMD, that they are
doing? And, also, will David Kay be on the commission?
MR. McCLELLAN: The short answer is that this will be a broad
assessment related to weapons of mass destruction and the spread of
weapons of mass destruction. Obviously, there are already
congressional committees, as well as the CIA, that are looking into
prewar intelligence related to Iraq, and that's important that they
continue their work as well. But this is a commission that will take a
broad assessment of our intelligence capabilities in the 21st century.
Q And will David Kay be on the commission?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I'm not going to get into any names on the
commission.
Q Is he being considered?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm just not going to get into -- and you shouldn't
read one thing -- one way or the other into that. But I'm just not
going to get into any of the names on the commission, but I would not
read anything into that.
Q We're hearing elsewhere that the threat that led to the
cancellation of some flights in recent days has now passed? Is that
true? Can you tell us --
MR. McCLELLAN: Are we off this issue?
Q No.
MR. McCLELLAN: Okay, let me stay on this issue, Mark, and I
promise I will come to it.
Q Talking about these doubts about the intelligence, and faulty
intelligence, what does this say that the intelligence the President
receives every day, and does he have any concerns about the leadership
of the CIA?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think the President addressed this very issue
last week.
Q He did, before he had decided to --
MR. McCLELLAN: He has great confidence in Director Tenet. He has
great confidence in the hardworking men and women in our intelligence
community whose number one priority is the safety and the security of
the American people.
Q Well, how about -- now does he look at the intelligence he
receives every day in kind of a different way, thinking that maybe this
isn't accurate?
MR. McCLELLAN: He looks at his intelligence -- that's how he
begins his day, by looking at the intelligence reports he receives, and
he takes that intelligence very seriously. And he is always asking
questions of those who brief him on those topics.
Q Does he have any doubts about its accuracy, authenticity?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, intelligence is always the best judgment of
our experts in the field and our analysts back here. And he has great
appreciation for the job that those in our intelligence community do.
Many of them go to great risk to provide us with the intelligence we
need to confront the threats that we face in this day and age.
Q That's really not an answer, Scott. I mean, does he have
doubts or doesn't he? I'm sure he appreciates the hard work that's
being done, but does he trust the intelligence? And if he does, then
why is he convening this panel?
MR. McCLELLAN: I just said -- well, the reason he is convening
this panel -- let me go directly to that -- is because of the global
security challenges we face in the 21st century. I've made that very
clear. And given those new threats that we face, weapons of mass
destruction and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, particularly
when you're talking about outlaw regimes in closed societies and
terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, the President believes it's
important that we have the intelligence capabilities we need to
confront those threats. And they're doing -- and our intelligence
community is doing a great job in pulling together intelligence to
confront threats. But --
Q You don't expect anybody to believe that this is about
anything other than determining whether we go it wrong in Iraq or not,
do you?
MR. McCLELLAN: Let me finish. Let me finish.
As I was saying, intelligence is something we take very seriously.
It's very important that we have the best intelligence possible and
that's why the President believes we should have a broad look at our
global intelligence that relates to the new threats that we face. As I
said, that intelligence, in this day and age, that is pulled together
to confront these threats, it's new, it's more difficult and it's more
complex. And that's why it's important to do a broad assessment of our
global intelligence challenges.
Q But how can he have faith in what he's told in the
intelligence briefing?
MR. McCLELLAN: Ed, do you have anything on this?
Q Is anything being done differently, in terms of getting
intelligence to the President, than about 10 days ago, to make sure he
gets better, more correct intelligence?
MR. McCLELLAN: Ed, I think you're making a lot of assumptions
there. One, I never get in a discussion of the intelligence he
receives for a lot of reasons.
Q But just the process, ensuring the accuracy.
MR. McCLELLAN: I would point out, I mean, someone was about to
bring up what we're doing on the home front to protect the American
people. One thing that this administration does is take intelligence
seriously. And when we have actionable intelligence, this President
acts on it to protect the American people, and to protect our friends
and allies. And he has great confidence in the work of our
intelligence community. And they are working hard, day in and day out,
24 hours a day, to make sure he has the best intelligence that they can
pull together.
Q Would you clarify one thing? No one disputes the fact that
Iraq is part of this review. What is it that the President wants this
commission to look into regarding Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: Exactly what he has said, that we should look at
what we learn on the ground through the Iraq Survey Group and compare
that to what we believed before the war.
Q To see whether the intelligence was accurate or not?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, intelligence is always your best
judgment. I think people will tell you it's never going to be a
hundred percent, but it's important that we do as good a job as
possible. And the President appreciates the work of our intelligence
community. So that's what --
Q Can we move on to a different subject?
MR. McCLELLAN: Are we still on this subject?
Q Yes. Here, here, here.
MR. McCLELLAN: Okay, so who has this subject? Roger, Jeff, and
Steve. Okay, we'll go in that order.
Q We have other questions.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll go to Mark first, after this.
Q I just want to make sure, the Iraq Survey Group and its
findings, that will be folded into the commission, as well --
MR. McCLELLAN: What will be folded into the commission?
Q Whatever the findings are of the Iraq Survey Group.
MR. McCLELLAN: Sure. It's important that all those facts that
they gather be looked at in this broad context.
Q But it will become part of the commission's report whenever
it does report; is that correct?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's the plan, that's the intention.
Q -- have its own independent --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, no, no, it's not -- yes, the Iraq Survey
Group is doing its work, separately and apart from this commission.
But it's important that their work -- that the commission look at their
work as part of this broad assessment of our intelligence
capabilities.
Q How does the President have confidence in
intelligence-gathering capabilities of the CIA if, as Dr. Kay has said,
we got it all wrong? And, you know, here's the head of the CIA, George
Tenet, how does he remain in place if this information was all wrong?
He was head of the CIA when 9/11 occurred, when the USS Cole was
bombed. It seems like that this failure of intelligence goes back
quite a long ways, and, you know, once again, the fingers start to
point --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, let's talk about, we got it right that Saddam
Hussein was a grave and gathering threat. We got it right that he had
the intention and capability. He was a threat. We got it right. And
it was the right decision to remove him from power.
But as I pointed out -- and that's why the President will be
announcing a commission here soon, to look at the global intelligence
challenges that we face in the 21st century. It's important that we
take a broad look at our intelligence capabilities, particularly
related to the two issues that I mentioned, weapons of mass destruction
and the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Those are the serious
new threats that we face in the 21st century.
Q Paul O'Neill lost his job when the economy was tanking,
okay. Why is George Tenet still in place?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, the intelligence that you are talking
about related to Iraq was intelligence that was shared by agencies
around the world. It was intelligence that was shared by the United
Nations. It was Saddam Hussein's choice to continue to defy the
international community. He was given every opportunity, including one
final opportunity, to come clean.
But that's why I pointed out that we, in the context of the new
threats that we face, we are dealing with outlaw regimes and closed,
secretive societies. These are outlaw regimes that go to great lengths
to conceal their conduct to deceive and to deny and to hide. And
that's why it's important that we make sure that we're doing as good a
job as possible to gather the intelligence and be able to confront
these threats.
Q Briefly, what sort of qualifications are you looking for, for
members of this commission? And what was the Kay lunch all about? Did
the President want to get some advice from him or what, exactly?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I don't know if they're -- they're
probably finished by this point, but I've been here briefing you all,
so we'll try to get you more information as we can. But it's for the
reasons I stated at the front, that, obviously, one, the President very
much appreciates the work of Dr. Kay and his service as head of the
Iraq Survey Group. And Dr. Kay presented a progress report a few
months ago; obviously, there is more that he has been talking about,
that he believes he has learned since then. And so the President wants
to hear what he has learned and to get his views.
Q Qualifications?
MR. McCLELLAN: In terms of qualifications, I think, one, that you
can expect this panel will be bipartisan, it will have the independent
authority to do its job. I think the President will be looking for
people who are distinguished individuals, people who have a record of
public service and dealing with intelligence, as well as people that
may be continuing to serve in a public role.
Q Scott, can I ask one more on this before you move on? In his
daily briefing, how can the President have any confidence in the idea
that the intelligence that he is presented with on some of the most
urgent threats facing America, decisions on which he makes the
difference between war and peace, have any bearing on the facts?
MR. McCLELLAN: Have any bearing on --
Q On reality.
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, John, I think I just addressed some of
this. Our men and women in the intelligence community work around the
clock to do everything they can to protect the American people. Their
highest priority is the safety and security of the American people.
And they work together -- this intelligence information, and pull
together the best judgments possible.
Obviously, if there are ways going forward that we can improve our
abilities to address these new threats that we face, we want to do
that. That's why the President has made it very clear it's important
that we have a bipartisan independent commission to take a broad look
at our intelligence capabilities.
This is a different day and age that we live in from the Cold War
period. And there are harder and more complex intelligence -- the
intelligence challenges that we face are harder and more complex.
Are we off this?
Q Yes.
MR. McCLELLAN: And I will start with -- I will start with Mark
first.
Q Thank you. The aviation threats, is it, indeed -- the threat
that we had in the last few days, is it now over? What can you tell us
about the threat?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I think that when Secretary Ridge
announced that we would lower the threat level from high to elevated,
he made it very clear, that he said, "We have not let our guard down,
and we will maintain particular vigilance around some critical
resources." One of those he cited was aviation security. There remain
some ongoing concerns about aviation security. That's why we have gone
to extraordinary steps to make sure we're doing everything we can to
protect the American people who use our airlines.
And I would just reiterate what we have done in terms of hiring and
training professional screeners, putting federal air marshals on
flights, reinforcing cockpit doors. And we have been working very
closely with the airlines on these issues. It has been very much
working in a cooperative way. But when we have specific intelligence
that comes to our attention, we act on that intelligence, we share it
-- and that's what you are seeing done here.
But at this point, we do not have any new threat reporting,
targeting specific flights, like we did over this weekend and today.
But we will continue to stay on -- our homeland security officials will
continue to stay on top of this matter. There may be times in the
future when we get this type of intelligence, and we will take
appropriate precautions.
Q The specifics that caused cancellations in the last few days,
there is -- officials no longer consider that a threat?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there was intelligence based on specific
threat reports. And we didn't -- although the information was
specific, it was not specific as to the method in which they sought to
carry out their acts.
But, no, at this point, we do not have any new threat reporting
targeting specific flights like we did over the weekend and today, as
well.
Q Was that information connected to the Super Bowl?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I'm not going to get into specific
discussion of intelligence matters when you have ongoing issues here
that we are working on to make sure we are protecting the American
people. And I would point out that we continue to -- our airlines and
our homeland security officials involved in aviation security continue
to be vigilant and make sure that we are working hard to take all
appropriate precautions.
Q You keep mentioning that -- in going over the intelligence
that it's not just for our intelligence, it's international
intelligence that's shared. Have you thought of considering adding an
international component to this agency to oversee how the intelligence
work?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I think that I'll wait on the scope.
But I mean, this will be an executive branch-appointed commission, it
will be bipartisan, it will be independent. And its focus will be on
our intelligence capabilities, our intelligence capabilities here.
But, obviously, I mean, when you take that into consideration, you look
broadly at intelligence gathering, and a lot of the intelligence that
was gathered was done in cooperation with others.
Q Tomorrow starts the review of the Good Friday agreement. The
President's point man has left to go over and assume -- help in that
process. He revealed last week that Irish -- that Ireland's justice
minister is concerned over the trading of funds between Sinn Fein and
the IRA. Since Sinn Fein raises funds in the U.S., based on the
blessing from the President, is he going to consider this new
information?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll be glad to look into it and try to get you and
update.
Sarah, go ahead.
Q Thank you. Scott, Russia is planning to conduct its largest
mock attack by its nuclear forces in two decades. This maneuver
includes a simulated attack on the United States. Is the Cold War
heating up again? And is the President concerned about this new
Russian show of nuclear strength?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, on the Cold War, but I haven't seen that
specific report. But I would point out that we are working with Russia
in a number of different ways in the war on terrorism. That's a threat
that we both face in this day and age and there are ways that we can
continue to work together. Secretary Powell talked a lot about this on
his recent trip to Russia.
Q This is a serious question. Many viewers were really shocked
by what they saw yesterday in the Super Bowl at half time. What does
this say about America's morals, the society's morals? And does the
President have any criticism or comments to make about this?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I think the FCC has already said that
they're looking into the matter. I think our view is that it's
important for families to be able to expect a high standard when it
comes to programming. I think the FCC is looking into it right now.
Q Can they penalize anybody?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, the FCC is looking into it. So you might
want to address further questions to the FCC.
Q On the budget, the President has repeatedly called for Social
Security personal savings accounts, but they're not included in the
budget this year, yet he mentioned it in the State of the Union. Why
isn't it a budget proposal?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I think that our -- my colleague, our
OMB budget director, addressed this issue earlier in his briefing. But
it is a priority for the President. We need to take steps to say,
we've strengthened Social Security. One of the recommendations of the
commission that he appointed was for there to be a national dialogue on
this very issue.
The President believes, philosophically, trust people and believes
it's important that those -- that those receiving Social Security in
the future be able to invest a small portion of their Social Security
taxes into personal retirement accounts. He'll continue to talk about
it, and it's important that we continue to have a national dialogue on
that very issue.
Q Thank you.
MR. McCLELLAN: Thanks.
END 1:28 P.M. EST
|