tv American Perspectives CSPAN February 13, 2010 11:00pm-2:00am EST
and visions of their people and reality. this goes for palestinian leaders as it goes for israeli leaders. i will not speakxd forñrçó palen leaders. i will be happy to later discuss it. i am not authorized to speak of palestinian leaders. let me just tell you about israeli leadership in the last 16 years. the last 16 years of the peace process started in 1993. it started with a joint declaration of recognition. .
this was back in 1993. xdçóñiñrxdñiif you fast forwarde are today, i would say that 75, maybe even moreñr, if security d the right terms are achieved, 75 percent and more of israelis accept a palestinian state. this is an enormous change that did not happen just by chance. it happened the call -- because
the israeli government from the right and it can't be left educated the people. a historic peace between arabs and jews here in this small piece of land for all of us. we did some real steps, and i take some pain in be elaborating. the more we share our perspectives without filters of noise from all kinds, we will do better. if you look at 1993 until now,
the palestinian authority was created and gain control over more than 50%ñi of the land and populated areas with almost full authority. later on, we signed more agreements which we also carried out and there were talks about agreement to stateñr solutions. is it time to go? i just darted. çó-- just started. this is a start. çói would also like to agree wih tibi about other things.
including talking about sharing the land, including a separate peace. as they say and washington,ñr -- we are moving to discuss everything. i wish that we could see the same kind of preparation in terms of less incitement and more acceptance of the other side. i think this is the key. if we agree on that and if we agree that this is not a zero sum game, then we will succeed. [applause] >> thank you, deputy foreign minister.
tibi was born in haifa. he is one of the knesset's most recognized figures among intellectuals. he has participated in international legacy nations and has suggested in defining israel as a multi-cultural country. >> thank you. i it would like to thank you for this unique gathering that is unprecedented in is really journalism. all israeliñiçó journalists were able to arrive, i do not think anyone from gaza is here.
without saying that i feel euphoric sitting much higher than you, but i think you can feel how it is affecting me. it is very unique to be an arab in israel. it is a unique and tough experience. it is a daily struggle. it is a daily struggle in order to try to bridge the gap. it is a daily struggle in order to be equal.
demanding from arab members to be loyal. it is almost black and white. it is obvious because there are two relatives that cannot be -- narrative that cannot be breached. you know what happened in 1948. there isñi the zionist narrativ. from 1948 until now, palestinians are the victim of the zionist narrative. no one can expect the victim is to be loyal to those who have acted against them.
i am talking about deportation, destruction of the nationxd, but we do believe that the jews and arabs are citizens of the same state of israel should be equal. before 10 are 15 years, they are talking about discrimination between jews and arabs. those are now mainly talking about discrimination, especially under the title of israel and definition of a jewish state. israel is defined as a jewish and democratic state -- a jewish before the democratic. we doñr believe that there is a contradiction between the two
values. being defined as a democratic state, you should lead mainlyñi equal rights for all citizens. but you can not if you are defining yourself as a jewish state because according to this tradition, donald -- dani would be superior to amed. to be a democratic state, it is to be equal. last week i issued a motion in
the knesset, i proposed the equal valueñi between all citizens. i asked for the law to say that israel should have planned for all of its citizens. no one minister supported my motion. no one minister. there was a vast majority who voted against my motion and, againw3ñig the knesset. ñrin the basic laws of the
knesset there is no one basic law talking about equality as a value. ñrif i was asked to have a motin talking about equal rightsçó, te basic laws demanding equal rights for all citizens, not jews and arabs, but all citizens, secular and religious, it will not pass. it will not pass. we tried it. i demand equal rights. >> you say we are a democratic state, you see? >> in being intimidated by the guy. -- i am it being intimidated by the guy. i would like, minister
government talked about his meeting. if he is trying to say that israel should be with equal rights for all citizens, there is no one aspect of israel were equal rights are or jews and arabs. that is why iñr do appeal from here to be secretary-general not toñr approve the membership of israel unless there are equal rights and equal budgets for
arab citizens just like jewish citizens in israel. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much mr. tibi. that brings us full-circle. we want to call upon you, the journalists, to ask questions. i just ask that we do not make statements. that we are able to address it to we are and to whom you are going to address the question. i am going to bring in the translator said that any questions that are asked in arabic are going to be translated immediately into english for this audience. if we can pleas by ray's of hands began with those who are in -- raise of hands began with those who are interested. >> i would like to ask dr. tibi
çóñiçóñiit is contradictory to s going on on the ground as far as failure in negotiations. there was a great change some 15 years ago, that is true. my question is, how can we read in state and go back to peaceful negotiations if, in fact, mr. netanyahu is presenting a state without any clear of order, no control over the borders, he is not talking about jerusalem or the return of refugees.
i did not learn anything like this in political science. a country can be established without having security, without having a capital which we consider as its capital. >> thank you. what we see here is something that is unique in political science. we are talking about the creation of a new state that has not existed before and you will see that the irony of victory is that the palestinian state will be created by the jewish state. however, all of the parameters that you mention should not beacon -- discussed here because this is exactly what we are trying to do behind closed doors. if you want effective negotiations, you stated d
demands from the palestinian side, we have our own demands and we should meet half way. however, two cases in the past few years, there was a very apprehensive offered by the israeli government put on the table once by the former prime minister and the second one by former prime minister olmert. one was to arafat. they had very exact parameters including borders and, unfortunately, they were rejected. let me tell you also something that my friend dr. tibi said, i tried to get into a medical
school and could not. he is a very respected doctor in israel. when you talk about democracy and equal rights, and i believe we do have equal rights, however, i went to an economic school. i did not go to a medical school. dr. tibi is more competent than me so he should get it. the fact that he is not a jew did not prevent camp from becoming a very successful gynecologist. when we talk about a jewish state, a jewish state -- gsmçó s not just a religion, it is at -- judy is on -- judaism is not
just a religion, it is a way of life. we do not take it as an offense as jews, but as citizens. whether it was turkey, the ottoman empire, are egypt, we were loyal to the king. we were loyal to the country. let me emphasize that we do not ask anything that is out of the ordinary throughout history. it is a double standard that arabs-israelis do not accept israel as a state. they do have a choice, when we talk about a solution we talk
about the chance that arab- israelis would it go without going physically, but would change and transfer their citizenship. ñrñithere are 250,000-300,000 israeli arabs. when we talk about land that the palestinians' request, if we are to incorporate areas and to israel, while not those that will join the palestinian state? >> we have to be loyal to time
and try to get some more questions in. i want to set the record straight and let you know that there were journalists from gaza that did not get permission from home loss -- hamas. can we move onto the next -- >> [unintelligible] >> any questions? >> i have questions about his remark that i was accepted into a medical school in israel and that this was a sign of equal rights. i would like to say that i was
accepted because i succeeded in my exams. what is good in me is because of knee. what is bad in me is because of discrimination. second, about the idea of moving the arab citizenship to the state of israel. that is why we are saying that we cannot accept and we totally denounce the proposal of dealing with us as guests. you can move from here to there. we are indigenous.
we are born here. we do not want to deport anyone from israel, but if anyone should move, usually those who arrived at the end are supposed to leave first. we will not arrive lately to this homeland. >> we are going to move on. >> [speaking arabic] >> my question is for my colleagues, by journalists and media colleagues. i am from the israel
>> to whom did you abreast -- address your questions? he should get someone else a chance first. does anyone else want to ask a question? >> in david horowitz. i think is terrific that we can meet together as israeli and palestinian journalists. i think, and i am speaking to the palestinian journalists, we set out quite a good consentual summary that israelis would like to resolve the contradiction of trying to be a jewish and democratic state by reaching an accommodation with the palestinians said that the israel that is left is overwhelmingly jewish and maintains its democracy.
i think it would be useful for us to hear from our palestinian colleagues, what is the palestinian attitude. what about the right of return? i would like some sense from you about whether the palestinian public is ready for territorial accommodations, whether they are prepared for palestine to absorber refugees in the way that israel absorbed jewish or refugees. is there any hope of negotiated accommodation? there is a lot of despondency in israel about finding middle ground. thank you. >> do any of the palestinian journalists want to respond?
>> please translate briefly. >> thank you for the question. the palestinian public's attitude is very well-known and clear which is to work towards a two state solution. the leader produced a solution. as for the refugees, no one who is forced to leave will see this as an easy solution. everybody feel and see that the
ñi>> i would alike to reflect on what might israeli colleague has presented. when he watches palestinian channels he never hears any criticisms of the palestinian government or authority. to an extent that is true. it is something based on on what happens on the ground. we are suffering as people. we demand a palestinian state.
we demand abolishment of settlements. we demand to have a capital in jerusalem. all bids -- indeed, we are demanding these through our media. >> one last question. >> if i may, to questions. -- two questions. first question to mr. hanegbi, what can the prime minister offer that's netanyahu you does not?
we are not in power now and we are not in a position where we can negotiate. we do support the government's efforts to go forward and it renewed the peace process. we call upon the palestinians to give the prime minister a chance otherwise we will be stuck for years. we do not want to deal with the media about the refugee issue are about the nature of possible solutions in jerusalem. there is no way it can be effective if it is discussed in the media.
it must be behind closed doors at the table with the palestinians and we hope to be part of those negotiations. >> as you heard, i do not see much difference. i think we could have created a broad coalition. certainly we need leadership in the future. it is symptomatic to put the onus on israel. it could be just as relevant to ask the palestinian leadership if they believe they could reach an agreement with israel.
i would say that these things should be discussed honestly in a negotiation which would be direct negotiations without preconditions. i do not want to say anything that is presumptuous or anything that would be prejudicial to any agreement. >> if you could just say a couple words before we close. >> i feel that it was too short and maybe should be the beginning of an ongoing dialogue. we speak a lot and we fight a lot in the knesset for years and years.
this is an opportunity that i did not have much, to hear palestinian people who are involved in the media to reflect the feelings of their community and to can be partners with israelis. i think we should go forward and make more meetings as many times as we can. we would be happy to do it. this is a good opportunity for us to get to learn each other and be more knowledgeable of each other's affiliations. i want to thank all of you,
especially those of you who came from the palestinian authority. i want to thank you very, very much. [applause] >> before we close the session, i want to thank the palestinian journalists who came today. we are going to charter more buses and back and forth. there are a lot of things we are going to be involved in. most important, i want to thank each and everyone of you, the journalistic came out today. after all, you are covering these stories here. you need to have the access. most important, do not forget your colleagues. in this case, i want to thank
our staff because they did an incredible job. thank you very much. people do not realize how difficult it is to make hundreds and hundreds of calls. i just want to thank our hosting member. many thanks to the members of the knesset for joining us. [applause] >> it is the only collection of american presidential portraits created by one of artists.
see the entire collection on- line at c stands website, americanpresidents.org. >> president obama talks inxd hs weekly online address. then you hear from senator president obama is --ñi obama'si decision to try terrorist in civilian courts. >> all across america, people work hardñió to meet their responsibilities. you work your job, take care of your family, pay your bills. sometimes you have to make hard choices about where to spend and where to save. that is what being responsible means.
that ought to be a value that our government lives up to as well. over the past decade, this has not always been the case. 10 years ago we had a big budget surplus. 10 years later, those surpluses are gone. in fact, when i first want to the door, the budget deficit was at 1.3 trillion dollars and was projected to be eight trillion dollars. with millions of people out of work and millions of people facing hardship, people are paying less in taxes wall enjoying more services. each year, more and more tax dollars are devoted to tax -- medicare and medicaid. what has made these large deficit possible is the role of pay as you go. you cannot spend a dollar unless
you cut a dollar elsewhere. this is hell a responsible family or business manages a budget. this is hell a responsible government manages a budget as well. we made clear that we cannot increase entitlement spending or raise taxes by borrowing more money. the abandonment of this rule allowed the previous administration to cut taxes for the wealthy. in a perfect world, congress would not have needed to act. this is not a perfect world. this is washington. there is bipartisan agreement about moving a forward on balanced budgets. it is offered in overwhelmed by the politics of the moment.
the fact that it is a lot easier to spend a dollar than to save one. this is why this rule is necessary. i am pleased that congress has agreed to restore it. now congress will have to pay for what it spends just like everybody else. that is not all we want to do. even as we make critical investments to create jobs today, we have to continueñr too through the budget line by line and looking for ways to save. we have to cut where we can to afford what we need. this year i proposed another $20 billion in budget cuts. i have also called for a freeze in government spending for three years. it will not affect medicare, e1medicaid, or social security.
it will affect the rest of the budget. finally, i have proposed a bipartisan commission to provide recommendations for long-term deficit reduction. will take both parties coming together, putting politics aside, and making some hard choices aboutñrñiçó where we neo spend and where we do not. unfortunately this proposalñiñrs recently blocked. i will be creating this commission by executive order. the american people are tired of politicians to talk the talk but do not want the block when it comes to fiscal responsibility. if you canñi get in front ofñi e cameras and rant against the deficit, we must get the deficit for every dollar we spend and with the return of pay-as-you-go
as well as other steps, that is exactly -- exactly what we are doing. >> in senator lindsey graham of south carolina. the obama administration's decision to prosecute the mastermindxd of 9/11 makes no sense to most americans, including me. all of these cases were pending before military commissions before the obama administration dismissed charges. that was a big mistake. these allocate a terrorist are not common criminals. their attacks resulted in the biggest loss of american lives since the civil war. never before have we allowed nine-set a sense captured on the battlefield access to our civilian courts, providing them with the same constitutional rights as american citizens. allocate the terrorists should
not receive more rights than a -- al qaeda terrorists should not receive more rights than a common criminal. it is unnecessarily dangerous and creates more problems than it solves. former attorney general was the presiding at general in the 1995 trial. he has warned against using civilian courts in terre trials. the same concerns were recently echoed. in the 1995 trials, the government was required to expose the identity of all known co-conspirators to the defense. one of the conspirators was osama bin laden. our intelligence services later learned that this list made its way back to bin laden, tipping him off about our surveillance.
valuable intelligence was compromised. the rest is history. civilian trials create confusion. our intelligence services are already uncertain as to what rules apply. case in point, the christmas day bombing. this was a failed attempt to blow up an airplane over detroit. after being captured, he was read his miranda rights and asked for a lawyer. days later and only after his parents encouraged him to corroborateçó the began to talk again. is reading miranda rights to terrorists in any way to fight a war? the trial would be expensive. concern has been expressed that these trials could last for years and cost over $1 billion.
this trial should not take place in new york or any other civilian court. i believe there is a better way. ñii have been a military lawyer for almost 30 years and have great confidence in the military justice system. military law allows us to collect valuable intelligence without reading miranda rights ñrto any combat boots. it keeps them off of the ñibattlefield. as one of the chief authors, i am proud of the revised military commission act of 2009 which created military tribunal scholar on all combatants. this law was passed after extensive consultation with the obamaxd administration and received overwhelming bipartisan support. p,the military justice system s transparent, well staffed, subset -- subject to civilian
review, and was built around the idea that we are a nation at war. cliché mohammad should have their charges reinstated by a military commission. these trials will be presided over by military judges. it will allow us to move forward in this war while holding onto our values. i hope the obama administration will alter these policies. military tribunals will win this war and protect our nation from a vicious enemy. god bless the united states and all those who served. -- serve. >> coming up next on c-span, the national gay and lesbian task
guest: it is a wonderful way to humanize and personalize the past. to take even this and movements that otherwise might seem impossibly remote. there is something universal about the fact that we're all going to one day be on our deathbed. we are all going to face growing old. we all have to wrestle with questions of immortality and mortality. i mean, those are some of the themes that run through all of this. but it is also, frankly, and entertaining book. there are a lot of stories and anecdotes and order directly from the publisher at public affairs.com. >> earlier this week. the national gay and lesbian
task force held a meeting. we will hear remarks from the director. this portion is about 35 this portion is about 35 minutes. >> we love you. >> i love you too. when together, as kate said, we were digesting a couple of high- profile losses. but at the same time, we were fille ope, our minds filled with possibility and promise. our sweat, hope, money and work had helped elect a new president and a more lgbt friendly congress. finally, it seemed, we might, we might start building a solid floor of legal equality from which we could reach the sky of
freedom. the bush-cheney years were behind us. change was coming, and it was no longer a question of if, but when. for those of us who had been fighting for so long, and that is everyone of us in this room, and the millions who are not with us today, change was sounding pretty good. we believed, and why shouldn't we? he said, i am running court president to build an america that lives up to our promise of equality for all, it promised that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. he said it is wrong to have millions of americans living as second-class citizens. i will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all lgbt americans. we were eager to see what a
fierce advocate could do. but now, it is one year into this new administration. it is one year into this new congress. there have been advocates, but not fierceness. change is more than words. change is action. [applause] if we really are all created equal, if it really does not matter who we are, what we look like, or who we love, then it is time for this president and this congress to take concrete steps to ensuring that equality. [applause] and since the president and congress brought up don't ask don't tell alaska week -- last
week, let us start there. if the administration does in fact implement what it now states it can do under the existing law, the lives of thousands of service members will begin to improve, and the witch hunts will and spirit i thank the president -- the witch hunts will end. i thank the president for showing leadership here. i really do. [applause] but let me be clear. a year-long study, does not in a fierce advocate make. a year is far too long to wait. it is time to start using the executive branch to stop these discharges now while the congress moves to make these
shameful practices and. -- end. mr. president, the ball is in your court. you have the opportunity to go down in history as one of the few presidents who acted decisively to move human rights forward. we must hold equally, if not more accountable, the members of congress who stand [applause] their hands are not clean. i have been out in gay america for 27 years, since i was a teenager. i know that change takes time. but happen, it must. things take time, we're told. we are in two wars, facing an economic crisis. we are attending to health care reform, climate change.
look at the calendar. we will get to you. well first, i say those issues well first, i say those issues concern us, too. [applause] and i am looking at the calendar, and it is 2010. should freedom have to wait any longer. should equality be something we schedule? should we only act to end blatant discrimination when it is politically convenient? no. that is why we have come together this week. because the change we seek must come from us, from our strategic work together. we thought we would have leadership that would stand wie us and work for us. but that hasn't fully happened yet, so it is still up to us to yet, so it is still up to us to push, and in fact to lead. [applause]
we, we in this room, we across the country are the agents of change. we have the power to compel change. and while the struggle has become a political struggle, one used to divide people and turn groups in our country against each other, to rally electoral and political favor, if you step outside this entrenched political battle, at its most basic, this is about our humanity, our equality, and frankly, the integrity of our country. and when it comes to equality, you either have it, or you don't, and we don't. [applause] >> last june we asked people to send us letters. many of you in this room wrote them to us, that i then hand-delivered to the president. and when a school teacher wrote that she has to hide the fact
that she has a partner and two kids, and that she could lose her job if anyone finds out, she is not equal, and we are not equal. equality is a moral imperative, because who we are and who we love should not be the subject of political debate. it should not be put up to the political whim of voters, and certainly our lives should not have to be on trial. [applause] there can be no compromise on civil rights, no piecemeal human rights. these rights must be unabridged, and we stand with all those who seek the promise of equality and who still struggle for its fulfillment. [applause] >> and i suggest to those who say don't push so hard, just
wait, that sounds like advice from somebody already enjoying the benefits of equality. someone who can marry who they want. someone who can serve their country freely. someone who can enter a nursing home without having to go back in the closet. someone who doesn't have to face the intig knits of filling out form after form, deciding if they will cross off mother or father and write in a new word just to reflect the realities of our families. i know the pain of how this invisibility affects our children. and to that person asking us to wait, a little reminder. there is no such thing as being just a little equal. what has gotten lost in washington and communities across the nation is that this is not a political question. this is a moral question. justice and treedom are not just american promises, they
are not just lbgt promises, they are human rights. [applause] >> and when the president, when the president says he's committed to equal rights, and congress takes an oath to uphold the founding principles of our nation, that doesn't mean some rights. it means all rights, nonnegotiable. it is 2010, and we have waited long enough. [applause] >> if we don't leave here this weekend together focused on real change, last year's when will become if once again. compelling change to happen is and always has been up to us. and honestly, i take faith in that, because i've seen what we can do together. when we dedicate ourselves, when we decide we are not going
to settle for anything less than what we deserve. so while we wait for action, for the president to move beyond words and into bold action, and for congress to find its moral compass, we are going to keep pushing and working, and much of this change will happen in our own cities and states across the country. [applause] uu easy. ui it takes sacrifice, both personally and for our families . we in this room know that deeply. we've seen long days and long nights. and while at the end of those days there will be wins and losses, regardless we keep moving forward. we keep working together. we keep getting more support, and we keep getting stronger. no matter what happens along the way. the dignity of our lives will
not be deniet. [applause] >> and that is what the pundits missed in their post election discussion and analysis of maine. that ballot measure wasn't a reflection on our movement on on our goals. maine wasn't definitive or a turning of the tide any more than it turns out california was. do our losses hurt, particularly for families in maine, california and elsewhere? absolutely. does it mean we are giving up, allowing a temporary loss to stand in the way of history? absolutely not. [applause] this year, this year we gained marriage equality in vermont, iowa, connecticut, new hampshire and washington, d.c. [applause]
you did that work. we did that work. we successfully fought back attempts to roll back protections in places like gainesville and kalama stnch oo. you did that work. we did that work. and in cities large and small like salt lake city and redding, pennsylvania, we ensured protections to thousands more. we did that work together. our grassroots support is strong and growing. our progress on the local and state level is definitively forward, not backward. and mark my words, we will regain marriage in california, maine and elsewhere. [applause]
my grandmother has a magnet on her fridge. show has had it as long as i can remember, and i keep a copy of in my wallet. it says fall down seven times, get up eight. and well into her 90's, it has served her well, and it serves our movement well. we've seen that when we come together, when we focus, when we roll up our sleeves and dig in, we create change. in the past decade, through our work together, the number of states recognizing same sex relationships increased from two to 11 plus the district of columbia. the number of states outlaug sexual discrimination increased from 12 to 22. the number of states outlaug discrimination based on gender identity and expression jumped from just one to 14. [applause] [applause]
>> and we we have elected hundreds of candidates and defeated those who are not our friends. and just in this past year through our work together, as kate mentioned, we finally passed and got signed into law, the matthew shepard and james byrd, jr., hate crimes prevention act. [cheers and applause] t us forget that one of the important things about the signing of that act is that for the first time in this nation's history, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people are covered in federal block -- federal law. [applause]
and through the advocacy of our new beginnings federal policy project, a collaboration of 20 organizations, we have already made tangible federal policy changes that will improve the lives of lgbt people, including seniors, people with low incomes, and we have ensured that our marriages and our partnerships will be counted in the 2010 census. [applause] this is what can happen. this is what does happen when we work together. this year, i have been reminded again and again that our real inspiration comes from each other. we are the people to enable us to get up day after day and keep working. that is what really inspires us and keep us going.
it is the transgendered high school student who goes to school every day dressed as she wants, no matter what is said, and no matter what happens. it is the soldier determined to fulfill his or her dream and his love for our country, even though it is greater than our country's love for him. it is the parent who have committed their lives to stopping violence from happening in the first place. it is the game and working against racial profiling. it is the straight neighbor who walks side-by-side with us in this effort. these are our heroes. these are my heroes. for those of you to look at the last year and are angry, to those who are frustrated by the
pace of change and the circuitous route it has taken, i say, so am i.. but that anger, unless channeled, will not bring us change. that frustration, unless redirected, will not move us forward. that frustration, it turned upon each other, is destructive. [applause] and may i say, that is exactly what our opponents want. they want us a bit distracted and downtrodden. they want us splintered and sniping and arguing that one tactic will save us over all the others. they want as disorganized. our opponents have seen what we can accomplish united, and it
scares them. [applause] that is why, that is why this year we will not ask for change. we will not debate change. we will not plan for change and we will not wait for change. we will create change. [applause] there will be a when people will wonder how our rights were even an issue or a big deal. this state of inequality can not be our children's or our grand children's inheritance. [applause] that means stepping up and answering the call at this moment in history. we have an opportunity to lead. it is up to us to define what
must happen next, and what will happen next. if we do not step up, and -- if we do not step up with an expense -- and expansive view of what it means to be a lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered, if we do not explain what it means to be human, we will be making a mistake. an agenda? yes, i have an agenda. certainly. let's fight legislative battles. let's and don't ask don't tell. let's overturned the so-called defense of marriage act. let's make sure there is a domestic partnership enacted for all employees.
state by state, let us enact anti-bullying of laws to protect lgbt youth. [applause] but, but, let's not be defined by those battles solely. let's not be limited to those ways of defining our lives. we cannot let others see us as just these issues. that others see our struggle as more, as a movement for justice, equality and liberation, as a movement for human rights, is critical to our success. so, as we step into this new year, let us lead, let us a really, really lead. fortunately, there are no places, as of today, tomorrow we
will see, there are no places that face an imminent threat of an anti-marriage or anti-lgbt ballot measure this year. however, if they come up, we will be there. and yet, with eight back to ban on affirmative action -- with a ban on affirmative action on the ballot in a one state and other [applause] the issues that affect our lives. let us work for meaning cut --
for meaningful health-care reform that protect lgbt people. let us stand with the people of you gotta to fight homophobic laws and expanded the -- the people of uganda to fight, public laws and expanded because of human rights and globally. our voices need to be heard in these fights and on these issues, but not just on these issues. we must lead on all issues that affect our lives and our communities. take immigration. if we are truly a community and the movement committed to freedom, justice and equality, and then at reforming our nation's cruel and broken immigration system must be on our agenda for action. [applause]
today, there are at least 12 million immigrants, including at least half a million lgbt people, who are forced to live in the shadows of our society. they are people like harold, and 18 year-old gay man who came to this country from the philippines with his parents. this is the only country has ever known. but today, because he is undocumented, he cannot get a driver's license, a job, or a student loan. he is going to be arrested and deported to a country where he has no connections, no prospects, and where he cannot speak the language. there are people like victoria, an undocumented transgendered woman who was swept up by the immigration system, put into a detention jail, where she was denied hiv medication and medical attention, even when she
was vomiting blood. this caused her her life. she died chained to a hospital bed with to immigration guards standing at the door. there are at least 36,000 by national couples who cannot live together here in this country because federal law bans recognition of their relationship. so yes, immigration reform is an lgbt issue. [applause] at some point, the president and congress will pick up immigration reform. this fight will make the push for health-care seem like a walk in the park. [laughter]
it will involve incredibly hard choices, but let us be clear. we will stand by our allies in the immigration movement come what may. [applause] we need to make this next generation the decade our nation realized that we faced a far greater issues than who someone loves and wants to marry. our strength as a people is weakened and lessened when we fight each other rather than the social, economic, environmental and global concerns that face us all. the lgbt community is challenge, but we are creative and we are ready to create a vision of inclusiveness and a transformed society. if there were ever a time that
believe it or not, there are still thousands of people who don't know anything about our lives and to whom invisible. so as we are wont to do, let's start right now and create some change. please take out a piece of paper or your hand-held. i'm serious. now, at the top write "my life ." below that write if the talk, write, meet." now, as lgbt people and our straight alleys, i want us all
to commit to taking three actions every month for the next year. each month talk. talk to a neighbor, a co-worker or family member about an issue that affects your life. each month write. write a letter to the editor, write a blog, write in your facebook page. but write about an issue that affects your life. and each month meet. meet with your elected officials, meet with local nonprofits, meet with community leaders and talk about an issue that affects your life. when you get home, tape this up on your mirror or fridge with all of your other affirmations and reminders, or keep your text in a handy place. if all of us just at this conference commit to this, we will have taken over 72,000 actions just in the next year to move forward the visibility
of our lives, to engage and to advocate. advocate. 72,000 just at this conference. [applause] >> and i follow some of you on twitter, and you're my friends on facebook, so i know how far our reach is. and that isn't even counting the people watching us on c-span. but that is what we have to do. we have to take advantage of every available opportunity to push forward. we will create change. last year the right wing organization, americans for truth about homosexuality -- and believe me, there is not a whole lot of truth there -- used a quote from my annual speech here in one of their fundraising letters. like good activists, we turned around and used their quote in our fundraising letter. well, americans for truth about homosexuality. here is your money quote this year.
[cheers and applause] >> we are still recruiting. [cheers and applause] >> we are recruiting. we are recruiting a movement of people who care about freedom, justice and equality, and we will not stop until all people can live their lives without fear of persecution, prosecution or attack just because of who they are and who they love. we are still recruiting. [cheers and applause] >> let's see what they do with that. [laughter] >> for 37 years the task force has been at the forefront of change, and that's exactly where we plan to stay.
and we want you there with us as change agents. we want the task force to be your home. for those of you who suspend your days in public service working for change as local, state or federal government employees, you are home. for those of you who take action through blogs, social networking or tweets, you are home. for those of you who are an action or take to the streets today, you are home. >> those of you who remember stone wall, because you lived it, you are home. [applause] >> for those of you who like elton john and lady ga-ga, truly one of the queerest moments in grammy history, you are home. for those of you who have the
courage to proudly practice your faith, to take back your faith, a faith that may have rejected you or others, you are home. and for those of you who are straight and see yourselves in the fight for lbgt equality and justice, welcome home. [cheers and applause] >> the past work has never been homogeneous. we are diverse, dynamic and passionate. and because of that, we have not always agreed with each other. but together we always compel this country to pay attention to our lives. we always compel others to evolve toward fairness, and
that's what we are going to keep doing. let us inspire each other to lead, to create a society where equality is unconditional, where the acceptance of divertity is not a goal but a given, and where the concern is not who we love but that we love. let's go create change. thank you. [cheers and applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> in a moment, a discussion on pakistan's role on the war in afghanistan. later, israeli and pin journalists gather in jerusalem to talk about the middle east
conflicts. after that, on america's the courts, a look at the supreme court and popular court opinion. >> tomorrow on "washington journal," the former derek tor of the congressional budget office on his role in launching a new right-leaning think tank and jobs in the economy. and then robin of bloomberg business week talks about the latest economic report from the white house. and following that, "time" magazine's washington correspondent on his recent trip to haiti and ongoing are leave efforts. also, your e-mails and phone calls. "washington journal," live tomorrow at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> c-span 2's big tv weekend continues all day monday with programs dedicated to american presidents.
and this coming week, book tv is live in prime time starting tuesday night with contemporary thursday taking your phone calls, e-mails and tweets. for the entire schedule, go to booktv.org. >> and a discussion now on pakistan's role on fighting the war in afghanistan. from this morning's "washington journal," this is 45 minutes. would co >> joining us is a ikram s eghal. welcome to the program. what does this mean? guest: that kind of group that i for 33 years ago. a few years ago, we merged with another group that is called g4s. it is the largest private
security company in the world. it is multinational. my company is the largest private security company in pakistan. it three years ago, we took over 30% of pakistan. i became the chairman of both companies. host: when you say private security firm, who are you providing security for? guest: mainly to embassies, consulates, financial institutions, multinational companies. of around the country, we have a lot of clients that need protection.
pakistan has not been good for the last two or three decades. it is a booming business. host:ñr you wrote an item called "countering insurgency and terrorism." it has become an epidemic in pakistan. to counter both this uprising. we have to deal with two insurgencies, one being the taliban in afghanistan, the other direct it toward terrorism within pakistan in the world in general. tell us more about what he meant by that. guest: basically, there is always a lot of misunderstanding about terrorism and insurgencies. insurgency is basically something that people get and fight, the government forces. terrorism is a mind-set that actually target innocent people.
what has happened is that you have an institute in afghanistan. you have al qaeda on the borders of pakistan. we have two insurgencies in pakistan one is not directed against pakistan. the other is feeding terrorism within pakistan. one of the insurgencies -- the other -- these direct terrorism against pakistan. these are the places where al qaeda held up in bora bora after 2002. after 2005, when pakistan surrendered, they attacked pakistan in a very determined
and focused manner. that is why you see the we have more casualties because of the insurgencies in pakistan. host: what did you see as pakistan's role m. winning the war in afghanistan? guest: pakistan is central to bring in the region when the war. you cannot win it unless you win it in pakistan. we have to have a lot of ambiguity about this prevent part of it is pakistan's own fault. we could not understand that the insurgency that was implemented would eventually turn toward pakistan itself. we did not come to grips with this. part of it was because they do not understand the difference between counter insurgency and counter-terrorism. in pakistan, we have an ambiguity. we have gone after the two
insurgencies. at the same time, there are uncertainties on their border. eventually, they will come toward pakistan. we will have to do this sooner or later. host: we are talking about pakistan's role in the war on terror. if you want to get involved in the conversation, the number is democrat, 202.737.0002 republican, 202.737.0001 independent, 202.628.0205 on the front page of the inquirer, the headline is similar to what is in a lot of the papers this morning. a major afghan attack begins in
forces base would done on a taliban held town. they talk about the attack on of marcisia. it is the largest combat operation since president obama order 30,000 u.s. reinforcement here in afghanistan. what do you think about this attack? what role did pakistan play in this attack? guest: i think the first thing to understand it you see the attacks publicize. this is exactly what pakistan did. the reason was simple. they knew that there would be bad guys that would have time to run away. we were faced with 2 million
people that died. we took the risk. they can be uncomfortable. and these they will not be dead. whenever you go and attack an area, the damage -- this is what happened. stanley mcchrystal has given time to minimize the damage of civilian casualties. that is the way to fix the insurgents. you bring them up to fight. they have a choice. they can run away and leave their hideouts. on the other hand, they have places where they have stored ieds and their own materials. that is a loss they have to bear. this is a very big step.
it is important now because the pressure on the troops on the border is much larger. three divisions of the pakistanis were embolic. -- in a bald. reda-- involved. the bad guys have been fixed to a big extent. american forces have been minimized. host: our first call from ohio. on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i want to thank you very much for the pakistani effort. i do want to apologize for the back of the american health that
the taliban and al qaeda it is able to go across and reload and revamping come back over and our military. it is not the fault of our military but our government better they do not allow our troops to do their job. i just want to thank you very much for the effort and god bless you. host: your response? now this is exactly what we want to hear from the americans. the fact of the fatter remains the war in afghanistan is not
going to be won in afghanistan. you've got to win the war in pakistan. the pakistan army for a change is doing what it is meant to. it is fighting the war and successfully. we have this year, 18 billion, allocated for the national army, and for the pakistan army, $1 billion approximately. 90% of the casualties in that region, the pakistan army has ten. 10s% of that, the coalition has taken. 1%, another. this is ridiculous. you have to concentrate on building the capacity of the army to fight the insurgence and to fight the terrorism. there is a disconnect here. we may win the war against the
insurgents. but they have gotten to the urban areas of pakistan and you have to build up the counterterrorism capacity. counterterrorism capacity. that is a must. good morning. host: good morning. caller: i spent a year in afghanistan helping the air force. i was going to be your opinion the do the drawings that we flyover, i know it is a remote area. -- your opinion about the drones that the flyover. i know it is a remote area. i did a lot of reading but i was there. osama bin laden when he was fighting russia said he was going to break pressure. he also said the same thing after 9/11. i let it your opinion on that. we appreciate your service. thank you. guest: first of all, let me talk
about the drones. nine months ago, the drones were not very effective. they do not have the support they should have in the pakistani side. now we know there are officers sitting across the border that are detecting drone attacks. nine months ago, you had one out of 10 successes. that is very important. why are drone attacks important? pakistan does not like it. those droned attacks are taking out the bad guys. look at what they have achieved. . .
concerned he's a terrorist and he must -- if he's alive he must be taken out. there is a mindset which is very brutal. that we have seen in pakistan at first hand. you cannot imagine. even as i speak, even yesterday, these people, suicide, they are trained young people who are absolutely innocent people. they train them in suicide bombing and send them.
why don't they send their sons? why don't osama bin laden's sons sitting in iran or iraq or saudi arabia why don't they send their sons? they send other innocent people, people in mosques, people in funeral, people in residential areas. this is mindless and osama bin laden is a terrorist and must be taken out. host: next up is pat here in washington, d.c. on our line for independence. caller: hi. i've listened to the wars that are going on and how we are putting resources to violence and so fort, violence begets violence, but i don't hear very much that's coming from the other side. right here at home, we're oftentimes asked to reciprocate and help in other countries and so fort and it's very draining on what's going on here in our country. there's not a lot of reciprocation from our country.
they're asking us to do things for them. right now, we close our eyes and the things that are going on in our country, we call secrets. i'm reminded of many years ago when rosa parks refused to get up off out of the seat. she was paying taxes. she was working like everybody else and she stood up. that's a form of violence as well domestic violence. it's a moral violence that is going on. we went through the courts and everything and we stood firm. we were very focused on that and i see a lot of that being rolled back now. once we address a moral unconsciousness and this economic time hit on everything and it's a worldwide thing. instead of using through money, our rain showers, our lives, and our -- why don't we concentrate on what we have done right and go back to that and build a boilerplate and try to spread it
across the world? host: pat, what do you feel has been done right orxdçó should b conned to move ahead in afghanistan and pakistan? caller: what has been done right is the fact that this gentleman is able to talk openly and to come to another country talking openly without it being call a secret and i think as long as we're able do that, we can have the dialogue that we're having right now as regular people, as regular since. host: ikram sehgal, your response. guest: pat, it's because of the -- of the american people that we live in a democracy. that is very correct. i can speak openly because democracy has been fostered in pakistan. if you did not give that support, we will live under that dictator. we be be an oppressed people like everybody else. but the morality is when you talk about violence, you're
right. violence begets violence. where do you bring it to a stop? i think you have to take -- someday, and you have to talk about the mindless violence that this terrorist spread. look at what they did in 9/11. if you look at -- read the newspapers and look at the internet. you will see every day thousands of -- you know, hundreds of people dying in pakistan from one reason or the other because of the violence begetted by these terrorists. you have to fight them someday. you have to draw the line. that is where we draw the line. i am very grateful for all the help that you give us. it is true. you've got to bring economic sustenance very soon. people remember the military part and do not remember the civilian part. the military part is only 30% of the battle. the 70% is changing the hearts and minds of people. host: the lead story in the "new
york times" this morning under the headline "allies attacking big taliban haven in afghan south," they write -- the operation dubbedmosta iraq which means together is the largest offensive military operations since the american l.e.d. coalition invaded the country in 2001. its aim is to flush the taliban out of an area by 75 square miles where insurgents have been staging attacks, building bombs and processing the opium that pays for their war. is this the kind of joint operations that you're talking about, sir? guest: absolutely. if you allow them a stronghold, if you allow them an area where they have impunity, where they can stay, with they can build bombs, they can do -- let us -- i just want to take you back to
south of the country where it is the al qaeda stronghold. the inner quarter and outer quarter where they traveled. they have underground hospitals. they have laboratories where they used to make chemical, you know, i.e.d.'s. they used to store -- unless you deny them all this, similarly, this operation is very important. it is important for two reasons. one, that it really accomplishes a military task. number two, psychologically, it brings home to the taliban that no place in the country is going to be safe for them if they do that. it may bring them to the table. and that is in the end, what you want to do. is that what you want them to come to the table and negotiate on your terms rather than from the strength which is rather not from a position of strength but from a position of weakness which would be totally wrong.
host: johnson is our next caller in indiana on our line for republicans. welcome to our program. caller: yes. i am not pleased with the republicans of knowing everything, you know? but what i'd like to say about these mercenaries or security companies, you know, they're, to me, when you have to hire somebody by -- buy their loyalty, you're buying a leaky vessel and i think personally, this man might be honest but a whole lots of them is too much of a chance for them to become orchestrators of terrorism. and i don't think the united states should be spending their money on mersnares, patriotic soldiers just like i was is what you can hang your hat on.
and what they're doing, they're the rich people's watchdog. bankers have run our country. i applaud the new deal on this that they put some controls on greed. but for the last several years, everybody that goes to put controls on greed why, they're accused of going to socialism. well, that's all i got to say. thank you. host: mr. sehgal, your response to our last caller. guest: i think there is a misunderstanding about the role of private security companies, my company and i'm proud say that, we are not involved in the role that is, which is generally taken which you hear about, you know. you hear about black water stories, et cetera, my company is a private security company, which is not mercenary. number two, the fact of infidelity. i have had about 18,000 guards
in pakistan. for 23 years, we've not had one case of infidelity. and by the way, 3,000 of guards belong to those area which travel, fatah areas, we've not had one case of fidelity. now there are security companies and security companies. we have a statistic role to play. when we become active and act as and very correctly, if you act as army unit is supposed to, that is incorrect. that is a bad role. that is a mercenary role but our role is a passive role. somebody that tries to come to a building and you've got a guard. that is a role that like a security complining ours plays and it is important. because private security has a role to play and it takes the --
i would say the amount of effort tat the public security companies have do off their shoulders. host: ikram sehgal, does your company operate exclusively in pakistan or do you have members of your security team working in afghanistan as well? guest: no, sir. we are exclusively in pakistan. i'm a joint venture operation in pakistan. of course, it is in 87 countries. it also has role to play in afghan, but not with pakistanny personnel. our next call comes from cleveland, ohio on our line for democrats. mark, go ahead. caller: yes, my comment was -- or question -- well, comment. it is more or less i don't understand why we are still in pakistan and afghanistan fighting a war that we really have no business over there fighting in the first place. the republicans got us in this
mess, and everybody is mad at obama for not getting out, which he should. we should leave this problem to them. that is not our problem. we don't have no business over there in their country for no reason because we didn't create this mess. we should let them do what they do and worry about our troubles that we are having near in america. we are struggling. small business is taking a beating. big business is taking a beating. mortgage rates are low now, but our communities look amess. host: we are going to leave it there, mark. guest: i agree with you. why should americans die fighting in afghanistan or in pakistan in this is our war. give us the tools, and we will finish the job. but we do need support. i agree with you totally. this is our war, and we should fight it, and if there are any
casualties to be taken, we should take it. but you have to support us and give us the tools to finish the job, and we will do that. host: the u.s. military is setting up training centers inside pakistan. can you tell us what kind of work is going on in their training centers, and will those people eventually see action on the border between pakistan and afghanistan? guest: well, i think what is happening is pakistan has a para-military force called the front tore corps. it is something like the border rangers. the special operations command is training them, to build up the capacity take on the role of border management. if they do the role effectively, then you will have much less trouble. they have neither the capacity to tackle the insurgents, and they don't have the logistics
or the training. now the united states is providing that training through special operations command. i do not know personally about it, but i believe tremendous work has been done. . helicopt devices. it needs a whole lot of stuff to do counter-terrorism. we have an anti-narcotics force. we had a tremendous drug problem which we took out because the united states d.e.e.a. help us set up the anti-narcotics for me to say i believe if now, the united states ended the narcotic force so that the army does its
own work and the insurgency does not get involved, that is already to go. host: back to the phones. plano, texas. liz on our line for independence. good morning. caller: good morning. wow. there's a lot of subjects here. first of all, i agree with the man earlier that said that blackwater is a mess. and i would like to also ask the gentleman on the television if this same paramilitary group works in the cashmere area. -- kashmir area with india. that is really a tense situation. and i would also like to ask -- we have a lot of street gangs here in the united states and they are really basically domestic terrorists and i believe this sounds a lot like what pakistan's going through although on a much more highly armed level. as you said, 30% is military. the rest is hearts and minds. if we think about what these
terrorists are inviting to the civilian population, what types of things they are given -- provide dosh these people, then there's no recruiting tool. so that's really, gosh, this is my one call and i want to say so much but i will refer back to y'all because i don't want to host: liz has given us some stuff to work with. mr. sehgal, go ahead. guest: i do not know if they are working in the area because that is an indian territory. i don't think the indians would allow them. but the fact of the matter remains that you know, when you talk about hearts and minds like you've got the fatah, the
federal administer traveled areas, you've got a 100 people and you've got 95 people without jobs. you've got to give them a means of livelihood. we warned fatah return to a free zone. the united states hands idea of reconstruction zones. r.o.z.'s. that's a good idea but must be expand to include the whole of fatah and then the locals will have reasons to protect their means of livelihood and he's the way to go. because at the moment, unless you give them a means of livelihood, whether it's taliban or somebody else, at the end of the days, you've got to have a participant solution to them, a long-term solution and it's to provide a means of livelihood and i very much agree with you. that is the way to go. host: the last caller mentioned pakistan's relationship with india and i wanted to go into that a little bit further.
this is a "washington post" article that came out a couple of days ago talking about pakistan and india holding talks later this month. theñi -- host: the united states has been urging the two downs help stabilize the region where the neighbors have been competing for influence. talk to us a little bit about the relationship or a little bit more about the relationship between india and pakistan and how that relationship affects the situation in afghanistan overall. guest: well, you know, we have a good dialogue going which has been broken off because of the bombay attacks. india has been a hostage to this mantra that pakistan should do more as far as terrorist is
concerned. there is no doubt pakistan must deal with terrorism and we are dealing wit. but the dialogue between india and pakistan is a must. i have fought two wars in india and one of the greatest proponents for peace in -- i'm one of the great proponents for peace in india. south asia are going nowhere. they're always going to be going in war which is not good in pakistan or india. that dialogue must be taken up without conditions when the bomb buy -- mumbai attacks it is the largest in that region. what is happened if you look at all the borders of india, it has problems with all of its neighbors. china has got 17 zphabes no
problems. where as india has seven nightclubs and problems five of them. it is the leader of that area and it to go the extra mile to ensure it establish that's that area. it has got everything to win. as economic powerhouse, it acts at the capacity to build up the country. india must understand that. unless we have peace with india, we are going to stay in our district and no man's land forever. host: save the rubble has this message to say -- guest: it is possible. it is not only in there are terrorists. there are terrorists in india. they are there for the last 40 years and they are not doing india any good. they control 70 of the 600
districts. they take revenue from them. it is possible. but like i said, india has to go the extra mile and not become hostage to non-reactors. and that is so, we will alms be in a situation where there is any dialogue, they will come in and stage an incident and we will be back to square one. host: we're talking pakistan's role on the role on terror with ikram sehgal. we've got about 10 minutes left in this segment. back to the phone. keith on our line for republicans from connecticut. go ahead. citizenship good morning. first of all, this is -- caller: good morning. i don't feel, i don't believe our country should send the pakistani government or his shadow organization another dollar. we need jobs here. we need, you know, health in america. we shouldn't be sending all its
money to another country. and second of all, i don't believe the judgment is -- gentleman is over there fighting terrorists. i think you are fighting people who are displaced by the elite. he should know that bin laden is dead and has been dead and he said our country already sent $1 billion to help. down dow know how many places that can be stopped to foreclose with $1 billion? host: tell us a little bit the pursuit about osama bin laden. is there any evidence of where he is or when he might be captured or kill guest: we really do not know. there are indication of cedar hi we is in iran and may have gone to yemen. one does not know. but osama bin laden some time
back and there has not been any real evidence that he is alive. but i think he is alive for a symbol. that's my opinion. as far as zawahri, he's very much alive. we went into south afghanistan, he had enough time to take he and his own small group out. now, i am 90% sure he's probably left the region and probably gone to yemen or some other area because i don't think there's any place that he can hide in afghanistan. that is my own josh beckett. -- conjecture. host: ikram sehgal from pathfinder g4s. he writes sin kated --
caller: if you wanted to get somebody that knows about terrorism, you've got the right guy right here. i know here in the united states, if you have workers on strikes and you want them terrorized or you want families terrorized, you call -- that is one of the sleaziest company in the united states. they know how to terrorize workers. and i know how they how to terrorize people over there. host: let's move on to kevin in austin, texas. good morning caller: good morning. as far as winning the hearts and minds of the people in pakistan, when they discovered the u.s. military is using depleted uranium, it will be hard to win their hearts and minds. we have hundreds of thousands of
u.s. veterans that served in the first and second gulf wars in afghanistan that are suffering the effects of this depleted uranium, not to mention there's probably millions of civilians in the countries that are being attacked. i really don't see that the u.s. can win the hearts and minds and i have to question who the real terrorist is. to me, it's the u.s. military. host: mr. sehgal, tell us about the folks there in afghanistan and pakistan. do they believe that the u.s. is there to help them or hurt them? guest: before i answer you, i want to go back to frank from california. you know, he set off something that i want to tell you about. 1971, 39 years ago, a u.s. marine saved my life. he left the marines and became -- joined the "lapd" and -- lapd and became a detective. he is the man that saved my
life. he's won my life. that is to start with. as far as the question is concerned, as far as, you know the u.s. military, yes, there has been because of the propaganda war fought by the bad guys that has been a lot of bad vibes in pakistan. this has to be countered. it has be followed because the media, whatever happened, the media, you cannot imagine at the other day, i was reading a book and he wrote about the effect that even one sound bite can have on the entire operation. it is very important for us to win the hearts and minds through the media. the correct and the way to do so is to be credible. i want to go back about the gentleman say about g4s. 800,000 employees who do not think they're terrorized by anybody. host: wes lynn, michigan,
michael on our line for democrats. you're on the "washington journal." caller: yeah. good morning to mr. sehgal. i would like to ask mr. sehgal about the inherent corruption that has not been mentioned so far this morning regarding@@@@r we have to win the hearts and minds of the people. hasn't he known for a long time that afghanistanies the druglords and also the taliban have won the war and the bank accounts of the pakistani military and the politicians which he has conveniently not mentioned this morning. i would like an honest answer. thank you. host: mr. segal?
guest: certainly i would like to answer. there's a national reconciliation ordinance that i was directed to give to politicians and anyone else that is corrupt. i've been dragging that for decades that corruption has to be fought and there is corruption among the politicians and there has been corruption in the army, there's corruption in the army, there's no doubt about it. officers. there is no doubt about it. this is something that has to be confronted. you are very right. and i am not going to make any excuse about it. this is something that has to be tackled. now, you have seen what is happening in pakistan recently. the judiciary has struck down the national ordinance and has put the government, all the people who have been targeted for corruption back on the stand. they have to now go back to the course and clear themselves. that way, the judicial has been built up. there is no doubt. even the army which was i am sorry to say and i accept that
the some of the officers who are corrupt. look at what's been happening for the last two years. instead of fighting for the bank owners, the army is fighting the war. in that, they must be supported and i am one of the people who say that loudly, that while you do that, they must also go back and tackle those people who gave them a bad name. there's no doubt ab it. and as far as the judiciary is concerned, it has become a strong zpution we must support it. now, as far as in looking at the hearts and minds of people, you know, it's very easy. there's a very nice phrase to say it. you cannot vent it overnight or you cannot vent it in a space of years. and the way to do it is the dem way. the democracy has to be sustained in pakistan. unfortunately what has happened
is that because corrupt people were allowed -- allowed to come into part and sustain it, that is the united states must set a zero some policy towards corrupt leaders. the united states must not accept the bank account of any corrupt leader having the bank account in the united states or for that matter, european -- why be him crisk about it? if -- him crisk about it? -- hypocritic about it? host: if opportunity to find out more information about ikram sehgal and his organization, go to their website pathfinder9.com. we'll take this last caller for republicans. frank, go ahead. caller: thank you. i would like to suggest that
d.n.a. lends itself to what happens. they have been countries or whatever you call now for a thousand years or so. they haven't got it. our position should be see who you think is going to win and stay with the winner for whatever it is. it's just a matter of life with them. host: mr. sehgal, do you see how -- when there will be a period where things will change over there? guest: i'm very optimistic. i think what we have seen in the last two years has been a turnaround in the thinking in pakistan. pakistan used to be -- about corruption and about terrorism. we've seen first of all, the people come out of the street against corruption, bring back the judiciary into power and then we've seen what happens to them. that was a present danger to the
state. when that happen, the government resolved itself and finished all the liquidities in their policy and went out the terrorists in a concerted manner and they took out the terrorists in six weeks, something which they felt has not been done in six years but six weeks. they went after south afghanistan. once the ammunition is replenished, once the troops are rotated and the logistics have been built up, when we have done with our shortages of helicopters and nitrogen devices of which we have not a single one, we will certainly go after the other guys, the network, if they do anything, give any sust not to answer any terrorist in their midst, now, the fact of the matter remains the support has to come from somewhere. if that support comes. we do not need the manpower. we need the material support.
and that unfortunately is something that is nice to think for itself what its own strategic needsds are and >> tomorrow on the "wearn journal" douglas holtz-eakin on a new think tank and his job proposals on the economy. and roben talks about the new economic report from the white house. and following that "time magazine" jay newton small on his recent trip to haiti and ongoing relief efforts. also your e-mails and phone calls. "washington journal" live tomorrow at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> coming up next on c-span
israeli and palestinian journalists gather in jerusalem. a look at the supreme court and popular opinion. and later idaho governor butch otter delivers his state of the state address. >> his film "hillary, the movie" was the focus on a recent supreme court decision on a campaign finance. documentary producer and head of citizens united david bossie, sunday night on c-span's "q&a." last month israeli and palestinian journalists talked about the middle east conflict with members of the knesset. this event was hosted by the
mideast press club and it's about an hour and 20 minutes. >> greetings, shalom, >> greetings, shalom, i'm feliss friedson a member of the middle east press club. i'm proud to open this session of the middle east press club. please turn off orcell phones and i want to take a moment and just acknowledge our board members that are here today. many are sick. as you can hear from my voice unfortunately, yakov, can you
stand up. --? and these are some of the distinguished board members that are on the board of the middle east press club. the middle east press club brings local israeli and palestinian journalists together. but we invite members of the foreign press to our session to observe and to chronicle. and so i'd like to acknowledge connie musk chairman of the press association. connie, thank you for coming today. it's really an honor to have you. i also want to thank our distinguished guest and offer them my very special thanks and the impressive array of group of editors and bureau chiefs that are here today. thank you very, very for being here. it's about the democracy, folks. and we in the media profession
bare an awesome responsibility. no institution is more of an indication of a nation's relationship with democracy than the press. and all of its mo -- with all of its modern manifestations with blogs to new media, being here today inside of israel's knesset is evidence of democracy. but if democracy is in any part judged by press freedom, that freedom demands access. and today, the palestinian participants of the middle east press club are being granted the access so necessary in order to fulfill their journalistic roles and so necessary for israel's own sense of the democratic process. and for this, i thank and i applaud speaker rbilin and all
of our participant who is cleared their calendars to be here today because they do indeed realize today's event is. when we created the mideast press club in 2005, we were concerned that interaction and cooperation were casualties of the intifada. without access complete stories could not be told. so the middle east press club began to rebuild communication by reintroducing members of israel's press corps to their palestinian colleagues and palestinian writers to their israeli writers. we charted colleagues in tel aviv and row malla. today with the knesset speaker, minister of minorities, the
deputy foreign minister, the deputy foreign speaker and member of the knesset, chairman of the foreign affairs and defense committee were taking a giant step forward as palestinian participants are here as invited guests, free to interface with a cross section with israeli of political thoughts. our palestinian members are being welcomed not bi-by a single israeli lawmaker but by the speaker who carries within the primtor of the state and are representatives of the major parties. ladies and gentlemen, you can't be more official than this. yet some will see that palestinian journalists have not been regular participants among press coverings today here. but this often needs a push and we're delighted to do the pushing. as an american organize, the
media is once again supporting with hospices. i am speaking for the record. we're meeting today in the most visible and tangible manifestation of israeli democracy the knesset. we're joined by the most necessary and irreplaceable figure of palestinian democracy, the free and independent force of state. this estate is going to accompany the palestinian people into statehood. we want to thank ruby riblin. thank you for being with us. >> in all honesty, the first sessions of the mideast press club were marked by apprehension and caution as attendant dees openly questioned what was to be gained by their participation. it was only after several sessions and a whole lot of
exchanging business cards and cell phone numbers that we all realized how productive it is to have a colleague strategically placed to answer questions, rub down leads, even supply sources all in time to meet a deadline and i'm sure we all can relate to that. the middle east is an amazing laboratory for the study of democracy and even the crispyiest of evaluation can be looked by liking at the press freedom and the degree to which infrastructure create as system of checks and balances on its political leadership. at this time i want to call upon the ke net set leadership. before i do, i just have to take a moment to thank rabbi robertson. i know that you're not going to be able to stay. so we're going to take one moment before we move ahead just for you to say a couple of words. >> mr. speaker, my
distinguished colleagues, hanegbi and the one and only friend ahmed tibi which is our one of most influential m.k.s. when i visited the university, i knew i had protection because i went together with him. i apologize because in five minutes the director general of oscd will be in a meeting which i didn't know i had to participate since i'm a member. yes, israel's democracy is is a vibrant democracy. yes, we have to fight for democracy every day the way the speaker is fighting the way we all are. and i'll say one piece the israeli-arabs, i feel that while the valeie arabs which
are 20% of the population voting as israeli jews and the standard of living there, palestine and the neighboring countries, this government which i hope my intention and the prime minister talked to me that by the end of this month, we shall say also in the meeting of the holy city, we commit ourselves for a meeting with decisions of the government to change essentially the location of resources for the israeli arabs that is only 1/3 of the jews to allow extent because the government in the past did not give the same allocation of resources to the jews. and before i believe if you are from what we call the jabotinsky order, people from the liberal right only if you are from the left or the
center, this is something that should be done. it's not only just, it's not only moral. that would prove that we really practice what we preach, but it's also good for the jews and it's very good for the economy. because the growth of israel in the future would not be only good for the democratic system but based on two population that are the orthodox, but the arab population of 20% and eager to participate fully in the labor force and all its power and my -- all my intention, and i believe many -- all of the members here believe in that. and i will do all in my power as the prime minister promised by january 31 when the meeting will come, and it won't be only declaration. my last point we gather the
prime minister and myself all leading israeli businessmen two days before the president went there. many of the leaders, i say all of the leaders, jews an arabs say that we have to commit ourselves in israel to a new deal for the israeli-arab population. we didn't do in the past what we should do. and 2010 is the critical year. i believe that the historical paradox and i spoke with the prime minister that he can be the greater leader, but he has to follow the path of rabid. for people living in security, the palestinian leadership and for quality of partnership fully to israeli-arabs not only in voting but also in resources. i apologize.
and if you continue, i will come to answer questions after the meeting with the secretary general. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, minister abi. and he's a pro-fessor as well and he's the minister of minorities. at this time i want to call upon a member of the knesset to offer his greetings. we decided the time was right. they immediately saw the importance and did what they could to make this happen. mr. hagnebi and let's share a few words about him. he has served in the knesset for more than 20 years during which time he has held numerous senior positions in government including several minutes steer y'all portfolios. he currently chose the
important foreign affairs and decent committee he holds an international degree in law, thank you very, very much. >> thank you, felice. i would like to welcome the chairman of the speaker -- the speaker of the house who made a special effort to be here with us today. i want to welcome all my colleagues, vice minister demi alon. and all the gentlemen that are here today. felice found me after today's event. formerly it is true. we have your host and we have guests and christian and jewish people. we have parliamentarians from both the coalition and the opposition.
but put aside the distinctions and the differences, you'll find that all of us here share -- share a common vision. we're all really united. we are united because we have a common commitment to preserve and enhance the palestinian-israeli dialogue. this is what unites us all. and we're not presumptuous to take the role of the negotiator. we don't have the authority nor the skills for that. but our decision to initiate this unprecedented event today marks our recognition that israeli and palestinian media can have a huge importance and influence on the peace process and on the future of both peoples. millions of israelis and palestinians do not personally fit in the negotiation.
they don't sit in the negotiation table. but they read the newspaper and they listen to the radio. and they watch television. and they surf the net. so if israeli and palestinian journalists will get to know each other better, their consumers will gain a better understanding of our two societies. once an israeli reporter and a palestinian won can communicate in an open manner, they will be able to describe the fears and frustrations and hopes of both peoples in the most genuine spirit. the way to peace and reconciliation passes through fair and objective media, one that can serve as an honest mediator, affect ideas and emotions. this is why the work of mideast club and the media line is so
scrurebl. this is why i accepted feliss' challenge and agreed to host today's meeting. and this is why i encourage you all to proceed relentlessly with your vital activities. eventually they will bear historic fruits. i wish you all successful deliberations. thank you all. thank you all. [applause] >> thank you. you're beating me to it. >> ok. >> i actually have a gift for you. >> ok, thank you for that so very much. >> mr. speaker, allow me. ok. first of all, speaker ruben rbilin is one of the most political leaders and one of
the most respected. his teen your -- tenure has been marked by democracy. i hope you will recognize this as a historic day. i'm going to read to you what it says, to the honorable ruben riblin member of the middle east press club, it's my privilege to extend our gratitude and appreciation for hosting this middle east press club. it was created out of the need to foster communication around cooperation among professional journalists regardless and inspite of the political climate based on the ax yum that the complete story cannot be written unless he or she has access to all sides. the middle east press club was created at a time when israeli and palestinian journalists had no opportunity to chase down a
lead, conduct an interview or even pull the men or women on the opposite street because of the unbridaled vie lance. mr. speaker -- violence. your hundred hesitating willingness complete with the presence of the leading palestinian journalists alongside their israeli parts pays tribute to this body and its speaker realizing the link between democracy and a free and dynamic free press. you have taken a step toward the enhancement of this media coverage and its complicated issues by the enhancements of the journalism practice here. in appreciation for your effort and a commitment to this democratic process on this the
19th day of january, 2010, we thank you. >> thank you very much. >> chairman of the defense and foreign affair committee, deputy minister, deputy speaker of the knesset, i welcome you to the shrine of israel's democracy, the israeli parliament, the kene set. -- kene set. i think it is very important one. israelis the jewish democratic state and by this very definition, we have a conflict. conflict that we stand behind. the conflict between the idea of a jewish state with the right of return to the jewish
state only to jews while we have here among us people who were born in the historical land that jews believe that this is our homeland. sometimes it's almost un reachable. and we have a debate. we have a debate between between jews and arabs between jews and muslims. we have debate between jews and jews because the definition of a jewish state what does it mean? jewish state according to the bible, according to the judicial ideas of the orthodox people, on the jewish side.
and on the same idea how come we can say that it is a jewish democratic state, though one of the members of the knesset can change this definition to define israel as a jewish state and at the same time to say that no one can change the nature of israel as a democratic one. and that leads to a lot of confrontations, a lot of debates, a lot of differences of opinions. niverls, every one of us, also those who have brought not as socialists, because i have no ability to patronize anyone because i was brought up as nonsocialist. and that calls me a lot of problems because i consider everybody as a human being, although i believe in the right of the jews to create their
homeland, their own state and to return back to their homeland. we have a lot of thoughts because of that conflict because this is a conflict between two people, both of them are absolutely -- believe that they are on the right side. and i would like to say one thing. here, my family has come to israel 200 years ago, only because my ancestors belief that they should not pray to jerusalem three times a day but they should go live in jerusalem. they have come to jerusalem only to become -- why should we pray every day three times? return us back, dear god, to jerusalem. we have returned and we found all our friends, all our neighbors. we have found very good
neighbors and friends here in jerusalem. although during the years we have had some ups and downs. and we learned to understand that we are not doomed to live together, not in the middle east and not in israel. we are to live together and we have to find a way out to live together. sometimes we have differences of opinion about the way. i have a very good relationship with all the palestinian israelis who are serving in knesset. but at the same time, our ideas almost are unreachable. unless we know very well that there is no way to de part us. that there is no way for us back to learn to live with the conflict or to find a way in order to live with that. i welcome you once again. unfortunately, this is a day that we have an annual meeting with all the high court judges
in israel. and i apologize that i will have to leave this forum. although i would be delight nod hear what you have to say, but i will read the protocol. welcome once again to the knesset shrine of israel democracy. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, speaker. and thank you for your time. very important thoughts that he shared. deputy foreign minister danny was selected as israel's ambassador to the united states. but before that he advised prime ministers in the area of foreign policy. he returned to a political career. took up leadership as chairman of the international organization and is well known in his current position. member of the knesset danny,
please share a few words. >> thank you, felice, good morning. the honorable chairman of the defense and foreign affairs committee of the knesset. the honorable ahmad tidi and speaker of the house. felice and michael fritzen. i want to congratulate you for all the work that you're doing every day. i want to thank the member of the press, israeli press, arab, palestinian press and international press. i think that such events are the most significant in in really achieving what we all tried to achieve here, which is peaceful reconciliation, which is really co existence, dignity among everybody, justice among
everybody and when you do it on the people to people level, it's much more significant. it's longer lasting, hopefully everlasting than just protocols or agreements between rulers or governments. as if speaker of the house said here, we are de tinned to live together. and i think that the living here together will be much better for all of us -- destined to live together. and i think that the living here together will be much better for all of us in terms of living together, burying the past without forgetting but burying would be much better if we all believed that this is not a zero sound game. and unfortunately, at this point, i'm not sure that all of us, and i'm not blaming any one side here because this is not the idea here, but i'm not sure
that people understand that this is not -- not zero sum game. i think that be reconciliations, by working together everybody will stand to gain. now let me tell you one thing which will be a little bit provocative, but it's not. the everybody says the goal now is a two-state solution. i'm sorry to say, this does not really speak to me. it does not really speak to me because it is so narrowly defined. it is so narrowly defined because a two-state solution could be anywhere and everywhere and if you don't put the real content to it, this is meaningless. i say that the real definition of our objective should be peace, should be historic
reconciliations between palestinians and israelis, between arabs and jews. throughout the middle east, this should be the real goal. the goal should be peaceful co existence, dignity, justice and security to all, which will bring prosperity to all. now if -- if the way to this goal of real peace is through a two-state, let it be, two-state solution, that is fine. but don't put as the panacea to all the problems because it is that we respect each other. and i do understand that at this point because the motions are maybe two high, we cannot really discuss effectively the past. palestinians have their
narrative. they have the right for their own narratives, just as jews and israelis have the right for their own narrative. i do say to many of my palestinian friends, at this point there is no really point to argue about the past. we will never agree. let's build a future together. and we can build a future together. and if you look at what this government did from day one, april 1st of last year, it's been now nine months we went a long way. first of all by realizing the two-state solution is the way to achieve the peace that we all want prime minister netanyahu started with this historic speech as i said because it comes from a likud prime minister about a two-state solution. and then he went on be
reiterating this and by trying to move forward in terms of bringing the palestinians into a table and sit and discuss everything, but everything together all the top issues of refugees of israel of territories of everything else without any preconditions, really with open minds and open hearts. now let me tell you here that the leadership role, the leadership role today is to really bridge the gap between the national dreams and visions of their people and reality. this goes for palestinian leaders as it does go for israeli leaders. i will not speak for palestinian leaders. and i'll be happy to later discuss it. but of course, i am not authorized to speak about palestinian leaders. so let me just tell you about israeli leadership in the last
16 years. the last 16 years of the peace process that started, also a process that started in 1993, if you recall, it started with a joint declaration of recognition between the p.l.o. signed by arafat and by then israeli government signed by the then-late prime minister. it was a mutual recognition. it was a commitment by all sides to solve all of the problems in a dignified way. this was the initial recognition of each other. and this was the corner stone for the entire political process which was to ensue later on. now if you look at the israeli position, there was an evolution almost on a daily basis because it is quite
customary. it is natural. it is understandable that when two sides sit together, they are very, very tough opening positions. this goes for business. this goes for politics. this goes for diplomacy. almost everything in life. you want to buy an apartment. the seller wants to put the highest price. the buyer wants to put the minimum price. and somehow they meet together and they meet halfway. if you look at the israeli position from 1993 on when there was a consensus in 1993. and if you took a poll i would submit to you that probably 75% of israelis would deny or the possibility or would very much object a palestinian state. this was back in 1993.
if you fast forward to where we are today, i would say that 75, maybe even more, if the security and the right terms are achieved, 75 and more percent of israelis believe and accept a palestinian state. this is an enormous, enormous change that did not happen just by chance. it happened because successful israeli governments from the right or from the left educated the people, worked at a solution which again would be a real reconciliation. a historic piece between arabs and jews here in this really very small piece of land for all of us. so -- and we did some real steps. and i take some pain in
elaborating it because i think there is a chance here to explain to our palestinian friends here in the house to see how it is from our perspective. the more we share this, your perspective and our perspective without filters of noise from all kinds, i think this is the better one. so if you look from 1993, as i said to now, israel first signed on the interim and before 1994, 1995. the palestinian authority gained over more than 50% of the land. certainly all the populated areas, the six major towns in jew dea and -- judea and samaria. later on we signed more agreements which we also garyed
out. and there were -- we also carried out. >> can i please stop you for question and answer. >> question agree about evacuation of citizens. >> you see, this is a start. [laughter] >> you heard it here. >> yes, i would also like to agree with him about other things. you see israel is trying to d a lot of things, including settlement evacuation in gaza, including talking about sharing the land, including now a settlement freeze. maybe it's not perfect as you look it. as they say in washington, that the enemy of the good is the perfect. let's settle for the good here. and as we say now, we're moving to discuss everything. i wish -- i wish also that we would see the same kind of a preparation of the public in
terms of less incitement and acceptance of the other side, ability, legitimacy and inherent right. if we agree that this is not a zero sum game then that's great. >> thank you. >> thank you, deputy foreign minister danny ayalon. ahmed tibi. he was porn in the arab city of taiba and studied medicine. he is one of the knesset's most recognizable voices among intellectuals. he has participated in negotiations. mr. tibi, member of the knesset and also deputy speaker,
pleads. -- please. >> thank you. felice. i will try to thank you a lot about this unique gathering of israelis and palestinians, here in the knesset. all israeli journalists were able to arrive. not all palestinian journalists were able to arrive. i think no one from gaza is here. no one from gaza wasçó permitte part of those from the west bank were also prevented from arriving here. man agency only one representative was allowed. the editor in chief is arrested. he's european, i