02 October 2001
Transcript: White House Daily Briefing, October 2, 2001
(President's schedule, briefings from other agencies, NATO
reaffirmation of Article V, bin Laden involvement/Taliban demand to
see proof, when action begins/other steps to be taken, Palestinian
state/U.S. support, Prime Minister Blair/Taliban, U.S. coordination on
remarks, Saudi Arabia/support, Secretary Rumsfeld/Middle East visit,
economic stimulus package, India, Muslim leaders/visit with the
President/remarks, airline safety/federal handling of passenger
screening, Homeland Security Office, Banks/link to bin Laden assets)
(7780)
White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer briefed.
Following is the White House transcript:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
October 2, 2001
PRESS BRIEFING BY ARI FLEISCHER
INDEX
-- President's schedule
-- Briefings from other agencies
-- Statement on NATO reaffirmation of Article V
-- Laden involvement/who has seen it
- Taliban demand to see proof
-- When action begins/other steps to be taken
-- Palestinian state/U.S. support
-- Prime Minister Blair statement on Taliban
- U.S. coordination on remarks
-- Saudi Arabia/support
-- Secretary Rumsfeld/visit to Middle East
-- Economic stimulus package
-- Other fanatical violence/India
-- Muslim leaders/visit with the President/remarks
-- Airline safety/federal handling of passenger screening
-- Homeland Security Office
-- Banks/link to bin Laden assets
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
October 2, 2001
PRESS BRIEFING BY ARI FLEISCHER
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:20 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. I want to give you an update on the
President's day and share some scheduling information. Then I have a
brief statement I'd like to read, and I'll be happy to take some
questions.
The President, as many of you know, had breakfast at 7:00 a.m. this
morning with the four leaders of Congress, a bipartisan, bicameral
breakfast, where he discussed with the leaders the importance of
passing the stimulus package to help the economy, the importance of
taking action to help dislocated workers who have lost their jobs in
this economy as a result of the attacks, as well as the importance of
getting a bipartisan agreement on the budget and appropriation matters
that are coming up.
Following that, he had an intelligence briefing from the CIA. He had
an FBI briefing about latest developments, and then he convened a
meeting of the National Security Council at 9:30 a.m. this morning.
Following that, as many of you know again, the President went to
Ronald Reagan Airport to announce the limited opening of Reagan
Airport, starting on this Thursday.
Other events that you can anticipate this afternoon -- at the
Department of Defense, Tory Clark will brief at 1:30 p.m. this
afternoon. Secretary Powell will participate in a joint stakeout with
the Indian Minister of External Affairs, Jaswant Singh at 2:00 p.m. At
3:15 p.m., General Ashcroft will have a media availability with the
Canadian Solicitor General Lawrence MacAulay. And finally, at 4:30
p.m., Secretary Powell again will have a joint stakeout with the
Foreign Minister of Greece George Papandreou.
For tomorrow, on the trip to New York City, departure will be early in
the morning, first thing. Upon arrival in New York, the President will
meet with approximately 30 national business leaders at Federal Hall
to get their assessment and their projections of the impact of the
September 11th attacks on their important sectors of the U.S. economy.
The President is very concerned about the effects of the economy in
New York -- not only in New York, throughout the country. He will also
visit PS 130 and later have lunch with the Mayor.
Finally, I want to just read to you briefly from a statement about an
important action that has been taken by NATO. NATO has reaffirmed its
Article V declaration that an attack on any one member of NATO is an
attack on all members of NATO. And the President welcomes NATO's
determination that the September 11th attacks against the United
States were directed from abroad, thereby reaffirming NATO's September
12th decision that the attacks should be considered an attack against
all NATO allies.
NATO Secretary General Robertson stated that there were "clear and
compelling evidence" that the attack came from abroad, and he
continued -- and his words speak for themselves -- "It is clear that
all roads lead to al Qaeda and pinpoint Osama bin Laden as having been
involved in it."
With that, I'm more than happy to take your questions.
QUESTION: Can you speak to us about the timing, Ari? Are you fully
invoking Article V?
MR. FLEISCHER: The timing?
Q: Does that suggest that action may be imminent?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know I'm not going to discuss anything involving
the timing of when action may or may not be imminent.
Q: Well, can you speak to the timing then of the actual invoking of
Article V?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, this was just a follow-on announcement by NATO
that is just important to note. And I also note what Lord Robertson
said on the question of the evidence that he has seen, all roads lead
to al Qaeda and pinpoint Osama bin Laden.
Q: When are we going to see it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, I think we've discussed that at great length.
And what the process has been, is the United States has been meeting
privately with allies from around the world, talking about different
information and sharing that information.
Q: Why can't the American people see it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, it's the same answer that I've given before. If
there was a way to share that information with the American people and
with the press in this room without it being conveyed outside to the
terrorist organizations that would benefit from knowledge of how we
acquire the information we have, we'd like to find a way to do that.
But that's not immediately possible.
Q: The public has heard very clearly from the President and from the
Taliban. The President has said, turn over bin Laden, destroy al
Qaeda, meet all of our demands. The Taliban has said no on all counts.
The President very clear today, Tony Blair very clear today, the
window is closed, no more negotiation. In the President's mind, what
else has to be done diplomatically, financially, you name it, before
action can begin?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I don't think you should lead to -- jump to the
conclusion that anything else has to be done before action can begin.
Several things are going to happen, all at various stages and times.
And I'm not going to be able to tell you what will happen when, of
course. So the President has made very clear that the United States
has been attacked and he will take whatever steps are necessary to
protect this country.
Q: Is it fair to say then that there is nothing standing in the way of
a military response at any time, whenever the President makes that
decision?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the President has made himself abundantly
clear.
Q: Were you -- can you confirm the reports that the administration was
ready to announce that it favored a Palestinian state before the
bombing?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as the President said this morning, that, of
course, at the end of the vision that it's always been contemplated
for the Middle East that a Palestinian state is part of that vision,
and that it's important at the same time to respect Israel's right to
exist in security.
But, clearly, in the context of a negotiated settlement between the
parties in the Middle East, the United States believes that the
Palestinian people should live peacefully and securely in their own
state, just as the Israelis should be able to live peacefully and
securely in their state.
Q: Has the President stated so flatly as it was in The New York Times
and the Post today?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think I'll leave those judgments to you about what's
been stated previously.
Q: It does seem sort of new.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I can't comment on the timing of when the
newspapers publish their stories.
Q: Has the President ever come out and said that he supports the
establishment of a Palestinian state since his inauguration?
MR. FLEISCHER: I would have to go back and take a look at the records,
Terry, but I don't believe so. I believe that -- what I just indicated
and what the President said this morning is a reflection of what the
President believes, and you've heard it from him.
Q: How come we've never heard it before, in all this -- nine months?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the focus, of course, is on the immediate
steps, and the immediate steps are in the Mitchell agreement. The
question in the Middle East now is how to secure a peace agreement
that can allow political solutions that end in the vision that the
President described this morning to take place. That has to come
first.
Q: Is it also to win over the Arab states?
MR. FLEISCHER: Until that comes first, everything else was a follow-on
issue. So you've heard it from the President, but clearly, the focus
in the Middle East remains the Mitchell Accord and getting the parties
to begin the political process.
Q: Yes, but, Ari, to follow on that, all the public declarations from
this podium and from others in the administration has put the onus
directly on the Palestinians and on Chairman Arafat to stop the
violence before anything else happens. And now, there is this openness
to the idea of a Palestinian state when the administration, the
President was not able -- wasn't willing to approach that idea before
now.
MR. FLEISCHER: As I indicated, this is all in the context of a
negotiated settlement. And as the President said this morning, peace
in the Middle East is measured in centimeters, and the first step has
got to be an end to the violence, a cease-fire, the following of the
Mitchell Committee recommendations on security, which lead to
political talks. And at the end of the political talks, the vision
does include a Palestinian state. So it's not surprising; first things
first.
Q: Tony Blair today said that the "Taliban must surrender the
terrorists or surrender power" -- flatly, "or surrender power." Does
the President agree with that sentiment?
MR. FLEISCHER: Ron, the United States has been working very closely
with the British government on a common approach to combatting
terrorism and responding to the attacks. And the President welcomes
the Prime Minister's comments and his firm commitment to combatting
terrorism in the wake of the attack.
The President has said repeatedly that the United States will act
decisively to protect the United States and our friends from all
terrorist attacks, that are affiliated with or responsible for, and
those nations that harbor terrorists.
Q: That's not quite the same thing, isn't it?
Q: Blair -- hey, let me follow up. Blair went further than saying we
have to act decisively or, as the President said today, there will be
consequences. He said plainly, surrender the terrorists, or surrender
power. Can you be as plainspoken as that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me just put it in the President's words, because
that's who I speak for. And as the President has said, been very clear
on what the Taliban must do to avoid any type of military action. They
must hand over Osama bin Laden and other terrorists, destroy the
terrorist camps, ensure that the territory of Afghanistan will no
longer serve as a base for terrorist operations, and allow the United
States access to those terrorist camps to make certain that they've
been destroyed.
Q: Will they surrender power if they don't meet those demands?
MR. FLEISCHER: I can only speak for the President, and I can only put
it in his words. But the speech by the Prime Minister of Britain is
welcome.
Q: Why do we leave it to the British to send that strong signal? Why
didn't the President send that strong signal himself?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the President has spoken out very strongly on
his own.
Q: Not like that, he hasn't.
MR. FLEISCHER: It's the right of everybody to speak out as they see
fit, and the United States welcomes those comments.
Q: But, Ari, it has the appearance of a coordinated effort, with
Britain delivering the ultimatum.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not the spokesman for the Prime Minister. The
United States welcomes the comments.
Q: Did he see the speech, the President?
Q: What kind of coordination was there between the United States and
Great Britain about the Prime Minister's remarks? Because there were
reports yesterday that he was going to go so far as saying time has
run out on the Taliban, and that they now will face military strikes.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the Prime Minister's remarks speak for
themselves, and the Prime Minister speaks for himself and for his
nation. His remarks are welcome.
Q: -- agree with those remarks?
Q: Was there consultation --
MR. FLEISCHER: What's that?
Q: Was there any coordination between the U.S.? Did the U.S. have an
advanced indication of exactly what the Prime Minister was going to
say?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'd have to check with British authorities to determine
if there was any, to what degree. I don't know the precise answer to
that question.
Q: The Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan went on TV, said they condemn
terrorism, they still want proof. Are there any circumstances in which
you would offer them some proof?
MR. FLEISCHER: Steve, we'll continue to meet with officials and to
share information. I noticed President Putin today said that he has
seen all the proof that he needs. You have Lord Robertson's statement.
So we'll continue to meet with allies and consult, and share
information.
Q: Can I follow on that? It's not just a matter of governments to
government sharing proof, because there is widespread feeling within
the Muslim world that people haven't seen enough proof. Is there going
to be any public presenting of the proof of any form to convince not
governments, but the people?
MR. FLEISCHER: This is a rehash of an issue that we've been talking
about here for a week. Helen asked it earlier, just a few minutes ago,
and I've answered it.
Q: Not the American people, but people around the world?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've answered the question about what happens to the
public sharing of proof.
Q: So you're really saying, no, we can't at this point because it
might jeopardize --
MR. FLEISCHER: Clearly, any time information is shared publicly that
involves matters of proof, much of that relies on how did the United
States government get that information, how do you know enough to say
that that is proof. And the manner --
Q: You never tell us how we get information.
MR. FLEISCHER: -- in which that information is brought in, includes
sources and methods of how the United States gets that information. So
it's a quandary of how to share that information with the public, with
the press, yet not let it be available to terrorists who would benefit
from that knowledge.
Q: So the administration believes that it's enough to convince
governments --
MR. FLEISCHER: -- but again, the United States is very satisfied that
the conversations it's been having around the world with our allies
and with friends in the Middle East and others, is leading to
sufficient action that these nations are joining with us. And I think
that speaks volumes for itself.
Q: Can I just go back to the Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan's comments
today, saying that they'd be open to negotiations, but want to see
evidence first? Does the administration see this as a delaying tactic,
or as a sign that the Taliban is feeling the heat of the international
community?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think Secretary Rumsfeld has said it very well. The
Taliban have made so many different statements that are all over the
map, that what counts is the United States' declared statements, the
President's statements about what he intends to do.
Q: I just want to follow. Do you see, is the administration seeing any
sense of sort of disunity in the Taliban, and has there been any
contact between U.S. officials and any Taliban dissidents?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, Secretary Rumsfeld referred to -- you call it
disunity -- earlier today, and clearly, any time a nation has so many
of its people fleeing is an indication that those people don't support
that regime that is in place. And clearly, the Taliban seizing food
from the Afghani people, depriving the people of Afghanistan from the
means to survive, the repressive nature of the Taliban regime is all a
reflection of a regime that lacks strong support.
Q: Any contacts, though, between U.S. officials and Taliban
dissidents?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to get into any type of contacts of that
nature.
Q: To follow on that, the Ambassador's plea or, he complained that the
U.S. is sharing evidence with other nations, but not with them, and
that by sharing information and beginning negotiations, that would
open the door, holding out some notion that they might hand over bin
Laden. Can you officially respond to that from the White House
perspective?
MR. FLEISCHER: As I indicated just a minute ago, the United States
will continue to share information with Pakistan and with other
nations, and we're very pleased with the cooperation of Pakistan.
Q: But the Taliban was complaining. The Taliban's Ambassador to
Pakistan --
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't address Taliban complaints.
Q: Ari, there have been contradictory statements made by different
authorities in Saudi Arabia, including a contradictory statement
between the Minister of Defense with the father of the Saudi
Ambassador to the U.S. that have had contradictory statements. Are you
getting the full support and respect from Saudi Arabia? And I want to
ask you about the military --
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is very satisfied with the Saudi support,
and he has stated so publicly on a number of occasions.
Q: Fine-tuning this if I may -- the British press, at least two
newspapers, are implying today that Tony Blair says that war against
the Afghani Taliban is imminent. Without getting into op-sec, is that
a statement you're willing to buy?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I'm not going to discuss with you the timing of
any military actions.
Q: Not timing, but just imminent as a kind of a --
MR. FLEISCHER: The last I look up "imminent," it had something to do
with a sense of time. (Laughter.)
Q: Does the President agree with what Prime Minister Blair said today,
that the Taliban must choose between surrendering bin Laden or
surrendering power -- do you agree with that --
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, I think I've addressed the topic. I've
addressed the topic.
Q: You said his statement was welcomed. Does that imply that you agree
--
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't think anybody should expect two leaders to give
speeches that are carbon copies in every iota and every sentence and
every word. But the two have said virtually the exact same message. We
are united, we stand strong together. Britain has been a wonderful,
valuable ally and friend, and continues to be.
Q: When did the President see the speech --
Q: So you're saying that you see no difference between what the
President and the Prime Minister --
MR. FLEISCHER: We are together, and the President welcomes their
statement.
Q: Let me ask it this way, Ari --
MR. FLEISCHER: Britain is a good ally, and the President appreciates
Prime Minister Blair's efforts.
Q: Ari, does the President think it's possible for the Taliban regime
to survive if the United States intends to fulfill the mission that
the President has laid out?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, it's not a question of survival or not
survival, David, it's a question of honoring the demands that the
President has made, so we can protect this country. That's what this
is about. And I understand your questions about this, but it's always
important to remember the fundamentals here, that our nation has been
attacked, and the President will lead an effort to defend our nation.
And in doing so, he has made crystal-clear that he will take action
against those who carried out the attack and those who harbor --
continue to harbor terrorists.
Q: Ari, if I could follow that, Prime Minister Blair also said today
to the Afghani people that if the Taliban is replaced, Britain is
prepared to work with the Afghani people in building a broadly-based
government. Does this White House share that sentiment?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as I said yesterday, the United States is not
going to choose who rules Afghanistan. But the United States will
assist those who seek to create a peaceful, economically-developing
Afghanistan that's free from terrorism.
Q: So you're on the same page with Blair on that issue?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's the statement I made.
Q: On that point, Blair also suggested that this time Western powers
would not walk away, they would go back and mount some sort of effort
to help lift the Afghani people out of poverty if the Taliban were
gone. Does that statement also comport with White House thinking?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's no question that the United States is very
concerned about the humanitarian plight in Afghanistan. As I've said
repeatedly, the United States is the world's largest donor of food to
the people of Afghanistan. And the President will continue his efforts
to make certain that we can do everything possible, working through
relief organizations and others, to get food to the people of
Afghanistan in the future.
Q: The other question was about Rumsfeld. Apparently the Pentagon has
announced that he is headed to the Middle East. Can you tell us why,
and what the President has asked him to do?
MR. FLEISCHER: DOD is briefing as we speak, so you're free to leave
here and listen to the DOD briefing. He's going to several nations in
the Middle East, and they'll be able to give you the precise nations.
Q: Why him, not Powell?
Q: Has the President asked him to do something in particular, or is
this solely related to his own duties within the Defense Department?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, he's going over there for information-sharing and
for consultation with friends.
Q: To share information along the lines of evidence --
MR. FLEISCHER: It's the Secretary's trip and I think he can best
explain it.
Q: Ari, why is the Defense Secretary going and not the Secretary of
State? What message are you trying to send by sending Rumsfeld?
MR. FLEISCHER: Because it's perfectly appropriate for the Secretary of
Defense to go.
Q: I'm not saying it's inappropriate, but you make a decision on what
message you want to send in part by who you send.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think you may just want to talk to the Secretary, and
he'll be filling that information in.
Q: I'm asking the White House, why does President Bush want the
Secretary of Defense to carry out this mission? What is the mission,
and why not send the Secretary of State?
MR. FLEISCHER: Because he's the appropriate person to go.
Q: And why is that?
Q: Ari, would you go so far as to say that no matter what the Taliban
might say at this point, it may not make any difference? Are you
ignoring whatever they may say?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President could not have made it any clearer two
weeks ago when he said that there will be no discussions and no
negotiations. So what they say is not as important as what they do.
And it's time for them to act. It's been time for them to act.
Q: Are you ignoring their statements, though?
Q: Why not say -- has time run out?
Q: Ari, on the economic stimulus package, the President said he wants
Congress to move quickly, but also they need to agree on a size first.
I'm wondering if he's laying down any kind of deadlines or timetables.
I know you guys are unwilling to do that on the terrorism legislation.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President has not done that. The President was
very encouraged by the talks this morning, and I think what has to
happen next is each of the members of Congress -- each of the leaders
of Congress has to go back now and talk to their rank and file, to
their membership. These are the elected leaders, but it's very
important for them and for the White House to listen to the rank and
file. They play a very important role throughout all of these
bipartisan discussions that are going on. So that's the next action
you should look to.
Q: Do you expect movement on this in a matter of days, a matter of
weeks? What kind of --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to guess the time frame. I think that
there are a series of important initiatives that are moving in
Congress that are not limited to just the items that were discussed
this morning. Education, for example, is another one that the
President would like to see action on.
So, again, there is a deliberative process that the framers of our
government put in place that guides us, even during war. And that
process remains.
Q: Ari, but as far as the timing, is the size or the components of
this package, as well as when you announce it dependent at all on when
the United States takes military action and the reaction to that
military action?
MR. FLEISCHER: No.
Q: Ari, sorry to belabor a point, but would you categorically rule out
any kind of contact with the Taliban?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President could not have said it plainer. I just
repeat what the President said -- no discussions, no negotiations,
action.
Q: Have you had any contact, direct or indirect, with the Taliban in
the last few days?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's nothing that I'm aware of.
Q: Can I just clarify something? Earlier I asked you if, in the
President's mind, anything had to be done, diplomatically,
information-sharing-wise, anything had to be done before military
action could begin. And you seemed to suggest that, no, nothing had to
be done. And now Secretary Rumsfeld is going overseas to consult and
provide information. And so I just want to clarify that point. Does
the President believe that there's any diplomacy left to be done, or
anything at all that has to be done before military action can begin?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, obviously from September 11th forward, the United
States, at all levels -- the President, the Secretary of State, the
Secretary of Defense -- have been talking with our friends and allies.
Under Secretaries have been visibly and publicly going to visit areas.
So this shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody that the Secretary can
go.
Q: But what I'm asking is, at what point have we crossed the threshold
where the coalition is set, and we're ready to go, when the President
makes the decision? I'm not asking you a timing question. I'm asking
you in his mind, is military action ready to begin, or does more
diplomacy have to go forward, does more information have to be shared
with other countries?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, that's a question about timing, and I'm just not
going to go down that road.
Q: Could you say if more needs to be done?
Q: Ari, there's been an upsurge of fanatical violence in some other
parts of the world. Do you see any correlation? Do you think extremist
groups are taking advantage of the lack of attention paid to them to
conduct their violence?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not sure how to characterize what you say is
upsurge.
Q: -- and killings and massacres.
Q: Unfortunately, there are parts of the world where these things took
place before September 11th, and take place since. But I really don't
know how to characterize that as an upsurge. The United States has a
mission ahead of it, to protect our country in the wake of the fact
that we've been attacked. And the President is focused on that. He
will, of course, continue with the State Department, to work
throughout the world to promote peace in any regions of the world
where there is instability. But the President has a mission ahead.
Q: Ari, we've learned additional comments by some of those people who
attended the meeting with the President, particularly Ramsi Yusef.
Does the White House now have any second thoughts at all about the
people who were invited to that meeting?
MR. FLEISCHER: Jim, I think I've addressed that question repeatedly in
the last several days. There's no answer -- no different answer.
Q: Were you aware of all the things that those people had said before
you came, or was that a surprise to the White House?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, we were aware that there very well could have been
statements made that the President didn't agree with. The President
will have meetings with groups that he does not agree with everything
they say. But it's also important to remind Americans that even for
those who have differing views, that the rights of Arab Americans and
Muslim Americans must be respected.
Q: Ari, the President said this morning on the Israel-Palestinian
peace process that he's committed to working with both sides to bring
the level of terror down to an acceptable level for both. What is an
acceptable level? Is there an amount of violence which he sees as
acceptable, given the --
MR. FLEISCHER: You've heard the President say repeatedly, publicly,
that what's important is that both sides make 100-percent effort. And
that's in distinction to 100-percent results. And the President has
called on all parties in the region to make 100-percent effort.
Q: Some people believe that we have given a lot of time to
Afghanistan, sending one mission after another mission, and Osama bin
Laden may not be in Afghanistan at this time, he may have already
cross the border; number one. Number two, Indian Minister said
yesterday that they are the same terrorists, but they are under
different names throughout the world, including in India. There was a
car bomb yesterday, 35 people died. And also, if you can give some
detail of yesterday's meeting with the President and --
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that that was addressed yesterday in terms of
the meeting. A readout was provided yesterday about that. And as for
the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, I have no comment about that. It's
further proof of the multiple contradictory statements that have been
made by the Taliban.
Q: Ari, on the economic stimulus package, what is the trade promotion
authority -- on it, and when do you expect the President to take some
action about it in Congress?
MR. FLEISCHER: That remains another one of the important pieces of
domestic legislation that is pending on the Hill. The President
continues to adhere to his very principled belief that free trade
benefits all people, can help create jobs throughout the economy,
higher-paying jobs than is typical of most jobs. And so the President
is going to continue to push the Congress to make progress on trade
promotion authority while working closely with Democrats and
Republicans. It's clearly an issue that you must have Democrat support
for it in order to get it done.
Q: Ari, going back to the Palestinian state, could you address the
comments coming from some quarters that the reason that we're doing
this now is because we need to do something to reach out to Arab
countries for this coalition? And could you also address the question
of whether the President still feels, as he has said in the past, that
Yasser Arafat needs to do more to control violence?
MR. FLEISCHER: On the second point, the President does feel that, yes.
And that's why the President is calling all parties to make 100
percent effort, so that we can begin the process that leads to the
implementation of the Mitchell Accords, which can have a conclusion at
the end of a negotiated dialogue, which is something, frankly, that
Prime Minister Sharon said as recently as September 24th, that -- let
me put it in Prime Minister Sharon's words -- quote, "Israel wants to
give the Palestinians what no one else has given them, the possibility
of establishing a state." So I think it should come as no surprise.
It's long been the vision of a negotiated settlement.
Q: The first part of the question, though -- Ari, no, you didn't
address the first part of the question, the linkage --
MR. FLEISCHER: What was the first part?
Q: The linkage between these developments on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. Is it part of a conclusion on the part of the administration
that one way to make this that it's not a campaign against Islam, and
to solidify the support of Arab nations is to make progress on the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and to indicate support of a Palestinian
state?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, if you believe what you read this morning, all
those stories pointed out that this was in place prior to September
11th. So I think that deals with the question of linkage.
Q: CNN is reporting that, according to my State Departments
colleagues, that the Secretary of State is planning another,
potentially a speech reiterating that same point, and a series of
high-profile steps to make this case, in part to solidify support of
the international community, in particular Arab nations.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that if you're hearing things about what the
Secretary would do, I think you need to ask the Secretary.
Lester.
Q: Ari, the Washington Post reports this morning that the Bush
administration has dropped a Clinton administration action that
charged the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority with
alleged civil rights violations, because 93 percent of all female
applicants failed in its aerobics test, which test the Clinton people
charged was overly rigorous. My question -- given this commendable
Bush administration decision, Ari, am I entirely wrong to presume that
what you said, the President regards the best armed forces in the
world means that he will not succumb to the extremist-feminist demands
for females in ground combat units, will he, Ari?i, (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: Les, I've got to confess that I really haven't been
keeping up with aerobics since September 11th.
Q: Well, it is the Washington Post. You read that paper.
MR. FLEISCHER: I have nothing to offer you on that topic.
Q: Okay. Maryland's Republican leader, Dick Bennett, who was appointed
U.S. Attorney for Maryland by the older President Bush, recalls
vividly that when the Clinton administration moved in, there was what
he termed the "Reno Railroad," in which every U.S. attorney in the
country was fired. Now, given this, why did this President Bush,
through his Attorney General, give to the U.S. Attorney for the
Southern District of New York full authority to investigate the
presidential misbehavior of the same President who appointed her, and
who nearly 10 months after the apparencies of the "pardongate" outrage
still has neither any report, not any indictment?
MR. FLEISCHER: Separate and apart from the specifics of your question,
the administration, of course, left in place several U.S. attorneys,
and they have been being replaced on a regular basis. But to promote
continuity in government, continuity in prosecutions, and continuity
in justice, several U.S. attorneys were left in place.
Q: It wasn't the Reno Railroad, then -- there was no Reno Railroad in
the Bush administration, was there?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not familiar with what that term might mean.
Q: Up in Congress, the Senate Commerce Committee, on a bipartisan
basis, sent a very strong signal that they want passenger screeners at
airports to be federal workers. Is the President prepared to sign on
to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President proposed his aviation package, as you
know, that include the federalization of standards for the workers, of
background training. The President has some concerns about the
implications of putting all these new tens of thousands of people on
the federal payroll because he believes that there can be effective
safety at airports without taking that step. But he's aware that there
are many members of Congress who see it differently and he's going to
work with them.
Q: Also, on the airline safety, the package announced this morning,
the direct-in flight path to Reagan -- which I understand won't be
exactly a straight line, it will have a turn in it coming down the
Potomac -- what are the implications for any aircraft that strays off
that line?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm just not going to discuss things about
hypotheticals, but I think you --
Q: It's not a hypothetical.
MR. FLEISCHER: You just said, if an airplane strays off that line.
Q: No, I said, what are the provisions for an aircraft that strays off
--
MR. FLEISCHER: You need to get back to Webster's.
Q: What are the provisions for an aircraft that strays off that line?
MR. FLEISCHER: John, I think these questions need to be addressed to
the FAA, particularly on the flight path. I think you need -- based on
the premise of your --
Q: The President has ultimate authority over that.
MR. FLEISCHER: Based on the premise of your question, you need to talk
to the FAA about flight routes coming into National, because it's
going to differ from what you just stipulated.
Q: On homeland security, with this new agency being created, will the
Defense Department still have the primary responsibility for homeland
defense in its purest sense, or might it have to --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's kind of akin to asking, given the fact that the
government has a National Security Council, would the Department of
Defense still have primary responsibility for the defense of our
country. The purpose of the Homeland Office, just like the National
Security Council, is to tie together and better coordinate the
activities of, in this case, the 46 federal agencies, including some
at DOD, that have a responsibility in protecting our nation's homeland
defenses. So it's a coordinating post, it's a policy post. But
clearly, various agencies continue to have their vital functions,
which are much more operational and mission oriented.
Q: Has the President spoken to Tony Blair since he gave his speech?
MR. FLEISCHER: He has not.
Q: Does he intend to talk to him today?
MR. FLEISCHER: As always, I try to do my best to give you readouts on
phone calls. If there's anything --
Q: Did he talk to him before he gave his speech?
MR. FLEISCHER: If he's moved to pick up the phone, I'll advise you.
Q: Did he talk to him before Blair gave his speech?
MR. FLEISCHER: Define before. He's talked to Tony Blair several times
in the last several weeks.
Q: In the last 12 hours?
MR. FLEISCHER: No.
Q: Why is there no --
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, and then Keith.
Q: One more on the Middle East. Does the President's recognition of
the ultimate goal of the Palestinian state come as a reflection of the
administration's sense that part of the campaign against terrorism has
got to be to take the fuel out of the anger that some of these people
have, and that a Palestinian state and the U.S. working toward it
would do that?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, Terry, the President said it because it's the
logical conclusion of the vision, that the President talked about this
morning, at the end of a negotiated peace process. And that's why I
also read to you what Prime Minister Sharon said very recently. That
was just a week ago. Prime Minister Sharon's words are similar in that
effect. And I think you should see it in that context.
Q: But is there a new urgency to it at all?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's a consistent policy.
Q: I've just got a specific question I've got to ask.
MR. FLEISCHER: Triple follow-up.
Q: The al-Shamal Bank in the Sudan was found by the State Department
in 1996 to have been established with $50 million of Osama bin Laden's
personal fortune. In the embassy bombing trial there were also links
between that bank and bin Laden. Why isn't that bank on the Treasury's
list?
MR. FLEISCHER: As was indicated when the President announced it in the
Rose Garden, that's the first tranche. And I'm not going to be able to
give you a prediction ahead of time about any follow-on groups that
are listed as terrorist organizations. The Department of Treasury is
reviewing that as we speak, and there can be additional announcements
at any time. Q Ari, why is there no timetable for the stimulus
package, given its importance to the economy?
MR. FLEISCHER: Because, one, it's always important, when dealing with
the economy, to take a look in a measured way, to do the right thing,
not the rushed thing. And that is the process of the Congress. It's a
deliberative process, it's a thoughtful process.
But I also want to make the point, and this is something the President
alluded to in his remarks, about how important it is to send a signal
to the nation that the leaders and the members of Congress are working
together. This is the essence of bipartisan. And the President wants
to make certain that the country sees the men and women of the
Congress, Democrat and Republican, working shoulder to shoulder on
these issues.
Will there be some disputes down the road? No one can ever rule it
out. But the President thinks it's terribly important that the nation
see the leaders of Congress and the rank-and-file members of Congress
working together. This is how you do it. And that means Congress needs
the time and deserves the time to go back and vet some of these ideas
with its membership, Democrat and Republican alike.
Q: If I could have a triple follow-up, too. So it's correct to assume
that there were no deals made at this meeting this morning?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think there was --
Q: On any aspect of the stimulus package?
MR. FLEISCHER: It was a series of discussions about what people
believe are the right steps to take, both on the economic stimulus, on
a package of relief for dislocated workers, on the budget with the
appropriation bills that are now overdue, that are pending action,
probably this month.
So it was a collection of ideas from the leadership, an attempt to
arrive at principles then that those leaders can take back to the Hill
so that the various members of the Hill can weigh in now and move it
along.
Q: -- going to meet again this week?
MR. FLEISCHER: This is four follow-ups.
Q: Who's counting? (Laughter.) Are they going to meet again this week?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's nothing on the schedule at this time.
Q: Ari, it's been a little more than a week since the President turned
out his request for freezing of assets around the world. When the
Treasury provided us with a list yesterday of the countries that have
acted on that request, there were only 19. Missing from it were three
countries where there has been a lot of banking activity in the past
for those groups -- Malaysia -- and the President spoke to Prime
Minister Mahathir yesterday --the Philippines, Indonesia, which said
it would not join the list. What is the President doing to lean on
individual leaders of those countries at this point, a week later, to
get them on the list?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as the Treasury Department has indicated, these
actions have to be done in concert with the laws of those nations. Not
all nations around the world have the same laws that allow them to
take as vigorous action as others have done. And so there will be
continued focus through diplomatic channels, through the Treasury
Department, to work with those nations to get them to do as much as
they possibly can do. It's a recognition of the fact that some nations
have better laws to get the job done than others.
Q: Did the President raise this issue with Prime Minister Mahathir?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'd have to find out specifically, Dave.
Q: On the economic stimulus, one gets the impression that the
President does not want to announce anything that does not already
have broad support in the Congress from both Democrats and
Republicans. Is that the case? And, if so, to what extent does that
limit what the White House would like to do in an economic stimulus
package?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I just think you're seeing, as I indicated, the
essence of bipartisanship. And that's a process that lends itself to a
lot of conversations and a lot of venting after those conversations.
That is the President's intention here, because he thinks that's how
the nation is best served.
Q: In other words, he's not going to introduce a package for which
there is broad Democratic opposition?
MR. FLEISCHER: That would not be the essence of bipartisanship.
Q: Just three quick questions on homeland defense. Is Governor Ridge
expected to start next week in his new job? How will that office be
staffed? And what's the White House view of making it a Cabinet post,
a Cabinet-ranked post?
MR. FLEISCHER: The post will have Cabinet rank.
Q: What about legislation, assuming Congress would want to have a
Cabinet post?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President announced it in the manner he did because
he thought that was the most propitious fashion to get this office up
and running and to have the office well-administered. So Governor
Ridge will begin next week, and we'll have further announcements for
you next week about staffing and space and various White House issues
so you can be in touch.
Q: Is the President open to a discussion on the Hill to make it a
Cabinet post through legislation?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President will continue to work with Congress,
but he's made clear that this the manner in which he thinks is best.
Thank you.
END 1:58 P.M. EDT
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
