tv Washington This Week CSPAN May 28, 2016 2:26pm-4:27pm EDT
the diverse faith country of this community has responded in a positive way. i remember terry jones, the well-known muslim hater from florida, went up to dearborn to try to have a hate rally. there were probably more christians and juice at that rally opposing him than there were muslims. the second thing the muslim community is doing is it is voting and becoming a voting block. today we do not talk about the muslim vote, as we might talk about the women's vote or the black vote. there are a lot of states where the muslim vote is a critical vote. michigan, virginia, my own district of minneapolis -- most of the muslim votes are somalia votes. this is an important political block in my state, the somali community is a critical constituency for anyone who wants to hold office to court.
the muslim community is responding. it's not just responding by voting. it's responding by people running for office. people like rashida to leave in , people running every day, not just for congress the city councils, local races and things like that. i believe this anti-muslim hate is going to be responded to with a renewed investment in activism , and the people who promoted this hateful behavior are going to wish they had never done it because they are awakening a group of loyal, dedicated americans who love their country and appreciate the democracy we have and are going to rededicate .hemselves to it
with that, i will yield the microphone and await questions. rep. carson: thank you. and jessica and my good friend and colleague, keith ellison. i often say he and i are like batman and robin. he of course is that man and i'm robin. and i'm robin. it's a special time to have someone to work with like congressman ellison. the first muslim in congress, and i came shortly after keith. i came in a special election. various times straight keith mentioned the founding fathers. the great thing about the
founding fathers, as complicated as they were, they had a reference point from europe. they came over here to make it a point to establish in our constitution that there shall or thea religious office, congress shall not make any lobbyist and the establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. it was so important that they had to outline in the constitution. muslims have been a part of our great country since the inception of our country and arguably before the inception of our country. up in a predominantly baptist family. i went to a catholic school, former altar boy. my conversion came about at a very critical time in my life. i was a teenager. tenetsled with the great of catholicism and spoke to the priests regularly. puberty hit and i realize that
would probably not be the best path for me, but i was influenced by their commitment to service. even more so, the neighborhood i grew up in, street i grew up, a middle-class street, but surrounding that was a crack infested area. i saw muslims in my own community doing what law do or wast refused to incapable of doing. and that was pushing back on criminal enterprises, pushing back on drug activity. it was the height of the crack cocaine era. i was influenced by that commitment to public service through nontraditional means. muslim, and a young teenager, i had many run-ins with law enforcement just walking down the street. i was 17 one time years old and i was arrested at
a mosque. the charges were dropped. but that was a defining moment for me. i did not know that situation in 1991 would have me look back as a reference point and see now what were dealing with as a community. we saw a new -- new york city where the great new york police spying on mosques without having met the reasonable suspicion probable cause -- cause. police relationships with the muslim community are in large part frayed. but the new york police department has nearly 1000 officers who happen to be muslim and many of whom who serve in our military. there are muslims in our intelligence services. i come from the intelligence community and work for the indiana department of homeland security, working in
intelligence and counterterrorism. it's disappointing to hear folks who are running for the highest office in the land say they don't want muslims coming into our country. it's disappointing to hear people who claim to love the united states of america talk about and try to point fingers at how muslims are the roots of all society's ills. at theback and look discrimination against irish-americans, italian-americans, jewish mothers and sisters, latino americans, continually afro-americans, but nevertheless, we as americans cannot stand for bigotry. symbolism has great value. when i see rashida to lead, great value. when i see the councilman in new jersey, great value.
don't 8 million muslims have a political presence in our country. i can and keith can't remember pre-9/11 trying to register muslims to vote. the emphasis was being on an engineer, being a doctor, being a lawyer. it's true, you go to any major hospital in this country and you will find a major physician. go to some courtrooms in this country, you will find great muslim barristers, lawyers. the nearly 8 million muslims political much leverage. in a post-9/11 reality, the same community that built with racial animosities on one end, and you had instances of immigrant brothers and sisters who would not return the greetings of --to african-americans, now you're seeing this community question its identity in a very real way. , as evidencedng by the clinton campaign, as
evidenced by the sanders campaign, you're seeing a growing muslim presence in these campaigns, the question becomes how can we leverage our voting block to influence change. how can we come together through the coalition building, the interfaith movements that have taken place, through the works of my great friend rabbi snyder and russell simmons. in other examples in minnesota and indiana and across the globe where muslims are coming positive working for change in our society. i'm happy to be here. let's get to it. i'm going to go to questions and when i calling you, please say your name and affiliation. we talked a little bit about these experiences that other people have had of islamophobia, people attacking them because of their religion. have either of you in recent months had personal experiences
like this, and can you share them with us? rep. ellison: on the twitter feed, we probably get them every day. it's a pretty common thing. we've had them officially. ,hen i first got to congress one of my first experiences was with congressman virgil goode, who told everybody that if america followed the virgil go ode immigration policy, we never have a problem such as a muslim entry in congress. only problem is i was born in the united states. when peter can use the homeland security committee to only target muslims, that was anti-muslim hate and bigotry. it is official and in private individuals, i think it's very important.
help one of the messages i get through is not just bad individuals acting badly. there is an official component to this, and it must be addressed. we've gotten, threats. one thing is that entree and i and other muslims engaged in american political life and even some british muslims engaged in british political life have been threatened by daesh, which i also call anti-muslim hate because we don't do it the way they say we should do it. we're dealing with it on both sides are at people who proclaim islam who are haters and killers like daesh, and the trumps of this world. it is recent, it is frequent, but we are undaunted. >> you both seem to feel the you need to speak for the entire muslim community as the only muslim representatives in
congress. are there other members of congress who are standing up with you strongly, and who might they be? rep. ellison: -- rep. carson: i think of maxine waters, i think of one of my mentors, someone like emanuel cleaver, who is the former mayor of kansas, but also a christian pastor. i think it has a lot more weight coming from a christian pastor to speak out against islamophobia than it would me or keith. there are scores of members who are very progressive and forward thinking. cheri bustos out of illinois, my next-door neighbor. who put me on the intelligence committee. she deserves a lot of credit.
i think it speaks to the great leader she is. there are scores of people speaking out against islamophobia. rep. ellison: just the other day -- i -- steny hoyer and i stay late on a friday. where did we go? mosque ini went to a maryland, set down and talk with community members. after some of the hate was really pumping in december, entree and i and crowley asked the whole caucus to reach out to the members of the democratic caucus to reach out to muslims in their community. a lot of people have just come talkede very informally about how they have done this. even new members like congressman -- the guy with the auto dealer. don buyer has been a leader on this.
i want to mention those as well. >> you had a question? >> you have mentioned trump and carson. i think all the name few mentions are republicans who are guilty of some form of islamophobia. a native american recently had a piece recounting the year 2000 around hillary clinton after there were allegations she was taking for "muslim money returned the money -- quote, unquote muslim money returned the money. how do you respond to an incident like that? is a democratic party itself clear of, -- islamophobia sentiment? >> i support bernie running all the way through the election.
but i have to be honest and tell you that i'm not aware of that. well, i'm not aware of the incident. i'll tell you what i am aware of. i know when she came to minnesota -- this is just being fair and honest -- when she came she specifically reached out to the muslim community and had a sitdown to talk about anti-muslim hate. i know about that. ago whenow that years she was secretary, black caucus had a meeting with her and she had recently appointed a special envoy to muslim communities. ie said -- set andre and still -- she wanted to make sure we were talking and comparing notes. i don't want to say that something happened when i don't know that it did. but i can say that if that did , there is wait with her
reaching out as well. i'm not trying to discount anyone's experience. i don't have any information on it. i can tell you she did some not in anyway way contributed to anti-muslim hate. aberdeen is one of her closest aides. aberdeen has been the target of muslim hate herself. bernie guy. if you want to talk to i think should be president, i believe it's bernie sanders. rue, andfair, true is t she has no record i'm aware of of anti-muslim hate. guy --rson: is a clinton as a clinton guy -- as keith stated, one of her chief advisers and closest confidence -- confidants, who is phenomenal -- secretary clinton was in
minneapolis a few weeks ago. muslimsd to ensure that were not only there, they were a part of the process. there were a group of syrian americans who had a moment with secretary clinton. if you look at her history as not only first lady of arkansas, the first lady of the united states of america, and even secretary of state, she is the most travel secretary of state in u.s. history. whoever i go to embassies happen to have muslim ambassadors, they talk about the bridge building that was done under her leadership as secretary of state. when i go to muslim communities across the country, and the community is divided. some are feeling the bern and are of us, like me, climbing up that hill. but they respect secretary clinton because she has a
special sensitivity as it relates to issues impacting the muslim community, as it relates to on wanted surveillance, outright discrimination. becomese that once she president, we will see muslims in important positions in her cabinet. [inaudible] >> do you believe that mr. trump is appealing to the most radical sectors in the u.s. that usually did not vote, but now they are even offering financial help? rep. ellison: it's important to point out that there's a lot of
muslims in america of latin american origin. it's one of the fastest-growing parts of the american muslim community. let me also say that before he ever said they and the muslims, he said, mexicans are rapists and drug dealers. you are right, it's kind of an equal opportunity discriminator. i think it is incomplete to just say he's appealing to people's bigotry. what is really doing is appealing to people's tribalism. he's defining the tribe as white, working-class people. he's doing two things at once when he starts spewing hate at mexicans, people with disabilities, women. it's important to talk about his unbridled misogyny.
it's a tribalist it, paternalistic impulse to try to get some people to say, he's for me, and simultaneously make other people think, he's not for me, but that's what he's trying to do. he's basically making a caselist it -- tribalistic that he thinks will bounce in his favor. i got a feeling that as he tries to draw in people who feel alienated and are attracted by his message, he is simultaneously activating whole of allof americans colors to reject that nastiness. rep. carson: what's curious and i know that my people who love me get nervous when i say this, but i've read most of mr. trump's .ooks, i've met mr. trump
his persona betrays his rhetoric, which concerns me. i think the kind of machiavelli --machiavellian persona -- they feel disenfranchised. they feel like they are getting a smaller piece of the american pie. when you're talking about making america great again, that is a form of meta-messaging to a certain segment. we are about white brothers and sisters, largely blue-collar. for someone who's had muslim employees, as someone who has done business in muslim countries, islamic countries, you would think that the kind of sophistication it would take as an executive to make those maneuvers, to then spew very third-grade, junior high style
antics and rhetoric to gen up these crowds that generated a lot of media attention, respectfully, it concerns me. it tells me here is a guy who is willat showman, but who not stop at anything in order to garner attention to leverage it to his favor. that kind of impulsivity concerns me as it relates to someone who would be commander-in-chief. that kind of inclination -- i think that mr. trump is a classic bully. he has high emotional intelligence. withyou see him on stage marco rubio -- he can assess a person quickly and know what to say and do to get under their skin. that kind of impulsivity when you're dealing with a complex cities of foreign affairs concerns me when you have a country that may disagree with our policy on a particular position. and to then outright use our military as leverage to exact revenge for philosophical
disagreement should be a concern to most americans if they get beyond the rhetoric and emotionalism that comes with mr. trump. [inaudible] rep. carson: i would not say support is wide-ranging great mr. trump said, the mexicans love me. i think he's referring to 5 who voted for him in arizona. i think the support is greatly overstated. after 9/11, there were muslims who supported president bush. most muslims did not necessarily support president bush.
find inyou will always that has been subjugated to racism, islamophobia, and outright bigotry, there will always be some who feel it is important to go beyond the call of duty to placate to those who are calling for greater distraction against them. i can't speak as to why these folks are supporting mr. trump.s i would caution them in their strategy against conceding any kind of dignity to win favor with a bully. as anyone who has still to with a bully knows that once you give up your lunch money, it will not stop. keith and i are in new jersey and new york all the time with muslims who do not support mr. trump, with muslims who are critical of mr. trump, with
muslims who have articulated a progressive agenda that speaks to the sentiment growing in our country. i think the small section -- i'm not familiar with their background or it some of the muslims i know who have worked with mr. trump are from new jersey and new york. i don't have a background on the group. you ellison: i guarantee that if you were to see if there were any african-americans who supported george wallace, you would probably find a few. it's not unusual that you see a few people who believe in that. in my opinion, it's just -- muslims who support trump is like chickens for colonel sanders you think the you are going to be the chicken who doesn't get fried up? i think you better guess again. >> i think we have a question
from the phone. >> i have a question that was e-mailed earlier today. my name is david vose, a deputy chair of the newsmaker committee. this comes from susan of the "jewish poison opinion." jewish voice is -- "voic and opinion." her question is, is it possible that primarily muslim led anti-virtual and judea phobic throughout the world has legitimize the islamic phobic rhetoric you are talking about today? there's a number of assumptions in their. -- there. muslims and american juice have a lot in common. american lot of -- jews have a lot in common.
the truth is that on the issue of israel, palestine peace, there's a lot of approaches. i haven't to support a two state solution. -- happen to support a two state solution. this is a topic that cries out for attention and people want to focus their attention on what might be due to resolve that conflict. they are taking different kinds of approaches. and some of them might be more constructive than others. i will simply say that -- i would not say anti-muslim hate is connected to muslims raising around the current israeli policy vis-a-vis the palestinians. i don't think one is driving the other. there is muslim anti-semitism. there is jewish racism. every kind of people can be hateful as any other kind of people. nobody has a monopoly on bigotry and intolerance.
i will also add that simply questioning israeli policy in connection with the palestinians is not inherently anti-jewish. there are legitimate complaints people can make, and they should make them based on facts, based on good faith. they should never only single israel out for violations, because there's a whole lot of violations of human rights going on across this globe. at the same time, if there are israeli human rights violations against palestinians, i don't think it's right to ignore them. i certainly don't think it's anti-semitism to ignore fact-based situations when it occurs. rep. carson: we had a young lady at indiana university who was ineatened for being vocal terms of the expansion of settlements in israel.
i took a trip recently with the congressional black caucus. we push the issue with the israeli government about the two state solution, which i support. we also raised deeper concerns about the mistreatment of ethiopians as well. i have found that jewish americans in particular are on the same page as it relates to a it state solution, as relates to ethiopians not being discriminated against, or other africans who have an buttification toward israel once they get there, they feel like they are treated less than. beings, think as human we have to get away from the inclination to deify one particular group and realize we are all a part of one human creation. we may attach different mythologies to our identification to make ourselves feel better about who we are, but at the end of the day if we see ourselves equally as human beings, we can begin to unearth
truths that will solve some of our situations and concerns globally. i thought i also heard a little bit in that question about the issue of the fear of terrorism. these are touchy issues. separate the identity of a terrorist from the identity of the muslim? rep. ellison: we do have to contend with that problem. whenever we hear of a horrific, tragic incident the first impulse is to the welfare of the victims of that incident. the second question is if a muslim did it, you know it's going to be rough around here for a while. that's just reality. here's the facts. people have studied domestic terrorism and terrorism around the world. if you look at terrorism in the united states, antigovernment white supremacist groups are far more likely to commit acts of
terrorism that anyone who proclaims to be muslim. at the same time, andre and i are first in line to say if someone commits an act of terrorism and if they say they do it because of islam, prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. they have no quarter with the muslim community. think, this muslims who commit acts of terrorism, therefore all of you people are suspect. imagine this. when the ku klux klan inspires dylann roof to kill nine people at a church in charleston, we don't assume that all white males have to apologize or explain themselves about it. no one comes up to white males and says, do you condone this? we assume they reject that horrific behavior.
that's all people in the muslim community wants, to say look, i'm a person. and of course we are absolutely against daesh. they are threatening to kill us, if people don't know. an important question that we do contend with a lot. whenever you hear about refugees fleeing rocca and iraq, or you hear about bombings in iraq or you hear about these kinds of things, who do you think they are killing? they are killing muslims. most of the blood on the hands of daesh and al qaeda and these maniacs are people who are muslim. there is no love for these people, or al-shabaab. when al-shabaab kills people in somalia, who are they killing? cares think boko haram about the religion of the people they are blowing up or the girls they are stealing and raping? no, these are homicidal maniacs who quest one thing -- power.
that is what they want, and they need a legitimacy. the united states, where islam is a minority religion -- you may not sense this, but in places where islam is the majority religion, anti-muslims who live in america, islam is a good thing. why wouldn't these murderers sort of try to cover themselves with it, and use it to legitimate their evil, just like the klan says, we are christians, or timothy mcveigh says he's a freedom fighter? this is simply exploiting a philosophy beloved by literally over one billion people to legitimate their wickedness. that's my take on the problem. >> from the statistics you have been able to look at and law
enforcement, have you been able to identify their has been a spike in anti-muslim attacks, this year physical compared to last? and also, have you been able to see a correlation or our law enforcement officials seeing a correlation between those attacks and the actual rhetoric you are talking about? the islamic society of north america is headquartered at the edge of my district. vandalisman act of recently there. a youngve been muslims, lady who was threatened on indiana university, indianapolis' campus. thesek we are seeing kinds of instances, but what is most troubling is that you have people like mr. trump fanning the flames of islamophobia.
againstn muslims retreating in these kinds of times. i caution any group that has been involved in important efforts. you have a catholic group that has done work. you have jewish brothers and sisters with the jcrc's in places like new york, indianapolis, across the country who are standing up boldly and going to mosques, participating in services saying we will not let our fellow citizens be victims of this bigotry. that has been an increase since 2015, but the increase is important in these times. it is important for our friends in the media not to overlook spike in numbers, but to highlight these issues to hold our candidates accountable when
they make these kind of inflammatory remarks. >> we only have time for one or two more questions. >> sam brody. i wanted to ask when terrorist attacks occur that were perpetrated by muslims people often call on muslims in power to respond to condemn it. i'm curious what your calculus is like responding and if you face pressure from colleagues or leaders in your party to publicly respond? >> as i already mentioned, i think that when any horrific attack happens, any terrorist attack or a natural disaster, it is incumbent upon all decent people to publicly proclaim sympathy for the victims. particularly if you are in a leadership role like andre and i are. when a muslim has committed an act of terrorism or somebody proclaiming to be muslim or in
the name of islam, i do feel that unless we're going to ask people to denounce acts of terrorism whenever someone in their demographic group does an act of terrorism, then i think it is not really fair to say there is a special responsibility for muslims. but guess what, we do it any way. why? because we need to -- we're trying to fight this mistaken notion that -- that muslims condone these homicidal maniac'' behavior and we don't. and i can tell you this, that for everyone you hear muslims not condemning, i could give you sheets and buckets and websites and everything else. people condemn it. but the truth is it is not newsworthy when a muslim condemns terrorism, right. and the news -- the media kind of knows that we do it. it is not people that aren't
rushing to that press conference. and that is just the fact of the matter. so the bad side of that is that a lot of people who, you know, don't know what is going on might be under the mistaken impression that muslims are not condemning terrorism or they condemn terrorism all of the time and we are the number one victims of daesh's terrorism and qaeda's, too, and boko haram and al shabab and so we do it. but the truth is it is not with a certain amount of, like, you know, sense that, um, this has to apply to everybody or it shouldn't apply to anybody. >> no, i think often times we get those requests and -- i don't see myself as a spokesperson for all muslims. i'm just a regular guy from indiana who represents the seventh congressional district
who happens to be muslim but i proudly speak on these issues. largely because i think i -- i have a different lens and that is a law enforcement lens, starting with the sheriff's department in marin county in the county and the department of homeland security, now the intelligence committee. but also as someone who has been on the other side and had been pushed on a police car, who was arrested at 17 without justification, as an african-american. so my lens is different as a black man, and as a muslim where you have -- and a big guy. so you have triple the suspicion, and triple the assumption but it is an opportunity to talk about the issues and hopefully educate people on the law enforcement and the sacrifices that our law enforcement officers make each and every day. it is a thankless job, literally. but at the same time there are
elements in law enforcement and things that start -- that begin at the police academy that need to be corrected as it relates to a recruitment efforts and as it relates to practices that oftentimes solidify sexist and racist and homophobic views and anti-jewish views and so on and so forth. so i see it as an opportunity to speak to these issues and if i had a chance as a member of congress to talk about a transportation bill that i introduced, i'll do it as well but i'll still speak boldly about the other issues. >> [inaudible question] when you talk about the rhetoric, what is the solution and is there a specific legal solution? for example, i know there are a couple of -- circulated, regarding prohibiting using -- [inaudible].
is there a legal solution to this or is this just encouraging people to basically have this rhetoric? >> well, first of all, there is a whole range of solutions. it all depends on what the particular nature of the problem is. so, yes, in some cases there are appropriate legislative solutions we are pushing revolving around the issue not profiling people on religion. you have to behavior not, not just identity. that is one. but at the end of the day, mona, at the end of the day, this is something that americans of all faiths, including muslims, have to stand up and work on. and this is going to be solved when that mosque and that synogogue and the members in it sit down and that local community in minneapolis or indianapolis and talk about their shared humanity and shared citizenship as americans when that mosque and that christian community come together, that is
the root of it. because the community is going to solve this problem. we are going to offer legislation, there will be legal challenges, legislative challenges versus going to court. but let me end with a quick little story. this is how you're going to solve it. i was -- when michael brown was shot and killed in ferguson, only 12% of the people of ferguson were voting. and so when the next election came up, i went down there and a few members of the black caucus went down there to try to increase voter turn-out. and so one of the things i did is i went into an african-american baptist church. and in that church, i found salaam clinic. so now you have a black preacher and three muslim pakistani doctors -- maybe one of them was an egyptian and the other two were pakistani, but these
doctors and they are taking their saturday to see patients all day long for free. here is the kicker. this is very important. it is great you set this clinic up. they say we have been doing this for three years and we will start another one in st. louis. these have different racial backgrounds -- one is asian, the other is african-american. , all that superficial stuff did not matter because they knew they both had a mission and that was the meet the health needs of the poor people of ferguson and they were doing it together. this is how we will solve this problem because from there, people will come up with ideas on how to do cancer messaging to
civil come up with ideas without to sue when the government is abusing people civil rights which is a very important part of this anti-muslim hate conversation. they will be able to talk about holding people like donald trump to account because they will invigorate an electorate and they will be a powerful voting bloc, which you restart spewing hate, you run into trouble. andre and i are african-americans. you remember when don imas was running around talking about nappy-headed hos? he lost his job. it is not a good idea to be overtly racist against black people today because you will lose your job for that. for the muslim community, you can still kind of say what you want, any mean, nasty horrible thing. the muslim community as the build political cache. how do you do it?
build friends, connect with people you have relationships with. get media savvy. get out a narrative. anyway, -- >> to add on to keith's point, a point was made earlier about colleague. most of the trips i have probably taken, i have been the casesemocrat, in some only african-american. i have said some very inflammatory things against the tea party, but through those trips, you start talking to folks and you realize that your differences are not that great. democrats and republicans in those cases are kind of playing within the 10 yard line on a lot of things. you realize you agree you want better schools.
you agree we need to talk about critical capital infusion in certain places like minneapolis, new york to create jobs. our methodologies may vary but there's large similarities. i think there are legal remedies but you can't legislate human nature. we have to speak to the better part of human nature. the constitution, it's a great document but it's a flawed document. the same constitution identified african-americans being 3/5 of a human being. we had to go back and we had to have frederick douglass work with elizabeth stanton for women's suffrage to speak to our better nature to get lincoln to emancipate the slaves. we had to do the same when it
came stores desegregating the military, when it came to pushing jobs on the civil rights question and the voting rights question. i think the more muslims who participate in the political process, it presented different face for us. as our mutual friend, dr. german sherman jackson, think there is a movement taking place. even with african-americans, muslims, christians, jews and others, there is a common struggle but in the greater muslim community, you have muslims who were legally white in terms of checking a box for socially non-white and now they're making a transition because of this new found status. that is where the struggle begins. there is an opportunity there for education on both sides of the aisle. i've talked to some of my republican colleagues who happen
to have a muslim physician or a dentist. even though the physician or dentist may not be super religious, they still identify as being muslim and they still have complaints about paying for their child's education. they still have complaints about their son who won't take out the trash and just identifying with those common struggles can begin a greater dialogue about our common humanity. [laughter] >> we are out of time. thank you all for coming. thank you, congressman ellison. thank you. isthe libertarian party having its national convention this weekend in orlando. we will have live coverage tonight at 8 p.m. eastern when the presidential candidates face one another in a debate. you can see that on c-span as part of our road to the white house coverage.
>> c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up sunday morning, the transportation reporter for usa today will join us to talk about the head of the tsa's appearance before congress to address how the administration will handle delays at airports security checkpoints. it would discuss how tsa plans to resolve long wait times and look at the current staffing for the administration. jeremy butler, senior military fellow for iraq and afghanistan veterans of america, will talk about issues surrounding veterans. people talk about the recent comments made by robert mcdonald which links veteran way times to busy customer service. watch washington journal beginning live at 7 a.m. eastern on sunday. join the discussion. >> this week, president obama was overseas for a week long
president obama: 71 years ago on a bright, cloudless morning, death fell from the sky and the world was changed. a flash of light and a wall of fire destroyed a city and demonstrated that mankind possessed the means to destroy itself. why do we come to this place, to hiroshima? we come to ponder a terrible force unleashed in a not so distant past. we come to mourn the dead, including over 100,000 japanese men, women, and children. thousands of koreans, a dozen
americans. their souls speak to us. they ask us to look inward, take stock of who we are and what we might become. it is not the fact of war that sets hiroshima apart. artifacts tell us that violent conflict appeared with the very first man. our early ancestors had been learning to make blades from flint and spears from wood, use these tools not just for hunting, but against their own kind. on every continent, the history of civilization is filled with
war, whether driven by scarcity of grain or hunger for gold, compelled by nationalist fervor or religious zeal. empires have risen and fallen. peoples have been subjugated and liberated and at each junction, innocents have suffered. a countless toll, their names forgotten by time. the world war that reached its brutal and in hiroshima and nagasaki was among the wealthiest and most powerful of nations. their civilizations have given the world great cities and magnificent arts. they are thinkers with advanced
ideas of justice and harmony and truth. and yet, the war grew out of the same base instinct for domination, for conquest that had caused conflicts among the simplest tribes. an old pattern, amplified by new capabilities and without new constraints. in the span of a few years, some 60 million people would die. men, women, children. no different than us. shot, beaten, marched, bombed, jailed, starved, gassed to death. there are many sites around the
world that chronicle this war, memorials that tell stories of courage and heroism, empty camps that echo unspeakable depravity. yet in the image of a mushroom cloud that rose into these skies, we are most starkly reminded of humanities core contradiction, how the very spark that marks us as a species, our thoughts, our imagination, our language, our toolmaking, our ability to set ourselves apart from nature and bend it to our will.
those very things also give us the capacity for unmatched destruction. how often does material advancement or social innovation blind us to this truth? how easily we learn to justify violence in the name of some higher cause. every great religion promises a pathway to love and peace and righteousness, and yet no religion has been spared from believers who have claimed their faith is a license to kill. nations arise telling us stories that bind people together in sacrifice and cooperation, allowing for remarkable feats, but those same stories have so often been used to oppress and dehumanize those who are different.
science allows us to communicate across the seas and fly above the clouds, cure disease, and understand the cosmos, but those same discoveries can be turned into ever more efficient killing machines. the wars of the modern age teach us this truth. hiroshima teaches this truth. technological process without an equivalent progress in human institutions can doom us. the scientific revolution that led to the splitting of an atom requires a moral revolution as well. that is why we come to this
place. we stand here in the middle of this city and force ourselves to imagine the moment the bomb fell. we forced ourselves to feel the dread of children confused by what they see. we listened to a silent cry. we remember all the innocence killed across the arc of that terrible war and the wars that came before. and the wars that would follow. mere words cannot give voice to such suffering. but we have a shared responsibility to look directly
into the eyes of history and asked what we must do differently to curb such suffering again. someday the voices will no longer be with us to bear witness. but the memory of the morning of august 6, 1945 must never fade. that moment allows us to fight complacency. it fuels our moral imagination. it allows us to change. since that fateful day, we have made choices that give us hope. the united states and japan forged not only an alliance, but a friendship that has won far more for our people than we
could ever claim through war. the nations of europe build a union that replaced battlefields with bonds of commerce and democracy. oppressed peoples and nations won liberation. an international community established institutions and treaties that worked to avoid war, and aspire to restrict and roll back, and ultimately eliminate the existence of nuclear weapons. still, every act of aggression between nations that we see around the world shows our work is never done. we may not be able to eliminate
man's capacity to do evil. some nations and the alliances we form must possess the means to defend ourselves. among those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape illogical fear and pursue a world without it. we may not realize this goal in my lifetime. a persistent effort can roll back the possibility of catastrophe. we can chart a course that leads to the destruction of these stockpiles. we can stop the spread to new nations and secure deadly materials from fanatics.
and yet that is not enough. what we see around the world today how even the crudest rifles and barrel bombs can serve up violence on a terrible scale. we must change our mindset about war itself to prevent conflicts through deployments, and strive to end conflicts after they have begun. to see our growing interdependence as a cause for peaceful cooperation and nonviolent competition. to define our nations not by our capacity to destroy, but by what we built. perhaps above all, we must reimagine our connection to one
another as members of one human race. this too is what makes our species unique. we are not bound by genetic code to repeat the mistakes of the past. we can learn. we can choose. we can tell our children a different story, one that describes a common humanity, something that makes war less likely, and cruelty less easily accepted. we see these stories of the woman who forgave a pilot who flew a plane that dropped the atomic bomb because she recognized what she really hated was war itself. the man who sought out families of americans killed here because
he believes their loss was equal to his own. my own nation's story began with simple words. all men are created equal, and endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. realizing that ideal has never been easy, even within our own borders, even among our own citizens. but staying true to that story is worth the effort.
it is an ideal to be strived for, an ideal that spans across continents and oceans. the irreducible work of every person, the insistence that every life is precious. the radical unnecessary notion that we are part of a single human family. that is the story we all must tell. that is why we come to hiroshima. so that we might think of people that we love, the first smile from our children in the morning, the gentle touch of a spouse over the kitchen table, the comforting embrace of apparent, we can think of those
things and know that those same precious moments took place here 71 years ago. those who died, they are like us, ordinary people understand this, i think. they do not want more war. they would rather that the wonders of science be focused on improving life and not eliminating it. when the choices made by nations, when the choices made by leaders reflect this simple
wisdom, then the lesson of hiroshima is done. the world was forever changed here, but today, the children of this city will go through their day in peace. what a precious thing that is. it is worth attacking -- protecting, and then extending to every child. that is a future we can choose, a future in which hiroshima and nagasaki are known not as the dawn of atomic warfare, but as the start of our own moral awakening.
condolences. i expressed gratitude and respect for all the people in both japan and the united states. they have been committed to reconciliation for the past 70 years. 70 years later, these nations who fought each other have become friends, bonded in spirit. they have become allies with trust and friendship deepened between us. the japan-u.s. alliance which came into the world has to be an alliance of hope for the world.
one year has passed since then. president obama for the first time as leader of the united states, he has visited hiroshima, the city which suffered the atomic bomb. witnessing the reality atomic bombings, and renewing his determination for a world free of nuclear weapons. this gives great hope that people all around the world have never given up their hope for a world without nuclear weapons. i would like to give a wholehearted welcome by this visit that has been awaited by all the japanese people.
i express my sincere respects to the decision and courage of president obama. we are opening a new chapter to the reconciliation of japan and united states. and in our history of trust and friendship. a few minutes ago, together, i and president obama offered our deepest condolences for all those who lost their lives during world war ii and by the atomic bombings. 71 years ago in hiroshima and nagasaki, a great number of
this city 71 years ago, it is unthinkable. but of those, this must be in common, that any place in the world, this tragedy must not be repeated again. it is the responsibility of us to live in the present, to inherit this deep feelings. we are determined to realize a world free of nuclear weapons, no matter how long and how
difficult the road will be. it is the responsibility of us to live in the present, to make efforts. children who were born on that unforgettable day to make every effort, bowing for this light. this is the responsibility of this world to live in the present. we will fulfill our responsibility. a light for hope for the people in the world.
arlington national cemetery this memorial day to lay a wreath at the tomb of the unknown soldier. you can watch the annual ceremony live monday at 11 a.m. eastern on c-span. state department and treasury officials were on capitol hill to update members of congress on implementation on the iran nuclear agreement. the lead coordinator was among the witnesses. he was asked about the terms of the deal and iran's financial situation. this hearing is just under two
hours. mr. royce: this hearing will come to order. last week, a commander in iran's islamic revolutionary guard core made headlines around the world for boasting that iran could wipe out israel in less than eight minutes, and remember this is the same iran that secretary kerry is promoting as open for business. sadly in the four months since the nuclear agreement with iran was implemented few things have surprised me. i expected iran to continue full speed ahead with its intercontinental ballistic missile program, and it has testing, two icbms. and remember as the secretary of defense says, intercontinental means able to reach from there
to here. we have also seen the testing of ballistic missiles, and in case we misconstrue their intent, on the side of these ballistic missiles were the words "israel must be destroyed" in farsi but also in hebrew. it is no surprise that iran's abysmal human rights record continues, the executions continue, the torturing at evin prison continues, two more americans have now been taken hostage. and it is no surprise that the agreement with a $100 billion plus is strengthening the revolutionary guards and others responsible for these abuses. i'm not all that surprised that iran may hold its nuclear program to the letter of the agreement, after all it was this
committee that exposed the agreement's central flaw and that central flaw is the sunset clause. with its nuclear infrastructure kept intact and key restrictions that expire, iran does not have to cheat to get the bomb, instead it just simply must wait out the clock to get the bomb. but what is astonishing and that is the reason for this hearing, what is astonishing is the length the obama administration has gone to accommodate iran. it is bad enough that the administration essentially rewrote counterterrorism laws through executive action, or that it is hardly responded to iran's missile tests. the administration told us that sanctions on iran's terrorism, on their human rights, on their ballistic missiles would be fully enforced after the agreement. yet, it now says that non-nuclear sanctions would undermine the iran agreement. so what has happened is that the
white house is iran's policy now amounts to walking on eggshells. and in another odd twist, the obama administration is going beyond the agreement to purchase material used in the production of nuclear weapons from iran as one prominent expert summed up, we shouldn't be paying them for something they shouldn't be producing in the first place. but the state department has taken its advocacy for tehran to a new and disturbing level by trying to persuade major non-u.s. banks that doing iran-related business is not only permitted but is actually encouraged. as one witness told the committee earlier this month, we are acting as the business development and trade promotion authority of the islamic
republic of iran. international businesses must deal with the reality of an iran whose islamic revolutionary guard core controls the broadest of sectors across the iranian economy, not the administration's fantasy in which iran's behavior can be ignored and investment can be pushed into the country. they hear the warnings of the financial action taskforce which sets the global anti-money laundering standards as stuart levy, the former treasury official who was responsible, as we in a bipartisan way passed legislation over the years in this committee for sanctions on iran, that former treasury official in both administrations was responsible for much of the sanction's architecture that squeezed iran. as he wrote in the "wall street journal," why is washington pushing non-banks to do what is
still illegal for american bankers to do, and i'll just add to that, what the international financial action taskforce says no banks -- no banks should be doing? last week, secretary kerry went so far as to say that european leaders are looking at ways to subsidize investments into iran. where does it stop? and iran is still pushing for access to the u.s. dollar, the world's top currency. given the administration's lack of any resolve to stand up to the supreme leader, we are right to pursue legislation to prevent that from happening. and i now turn to the ranking member for any opening comments he may have. mr. engel: thank you, mr. chairman, thank you for calling this hearing. to our witnesses, welcome to the foreign affairs committee. i'm grateful that the
administration has kept congress up to speed on the iran nuclear deal throughout the process, and i know there are many areas where we can continue to work together on this issue. ambassador mull, it's good to see you again. assistant secretary countryman, we're glad to have your voice in the mix as well although we miss you in the balkans. and acting undersecretary szubin, you're doing great work despite the fact that you have to do your job with one hand tied behind your back. we hear a lot of talk on capitol one easy thing for our senate colleagues would be to send in a nomination for a vote. i'm sure at this point most of you know my refrain. i oppose the deal, i voted against it. i thought we could have done
better, but now it's in place and many too sure it is -- ensure it is implemented. today i hope our witnesses who are on the front lines of implementation can help us cut through speculation and political noisemaking around the deal and give us a clear picture of how things are moving forward. for example, we keep hearing because iran has not yet realize windfall, the administration is going around the world trying to drum up business for iran. it sounds like a political attack, usually that's because it is. i don't think we should meet -- make any concessions to iran. view at the end of the day, if businesses continue to shy away from investing in iran,
ton's leaders have no one blame but themselves. with a history of corruption, money laundering, support for terrorism, human rights abuses and an illegal ballistic iraq this notam, seem like a smart bed for investing. that's why the financial action task force continues to run -- rank iran as a high risk in vestment. i would like to hear about what we are doing and what we plan to when otherure iran areas of concern. as president obama wrote during the consideration of the iran sure thequote, made united states reserve the right to maintain and enforce existing sanctions and even to deploy new sanctions to address those
continuing concerns which we fully intend to do when circumstances warrant, unquote. i don't think we should be shy about slapping new sanctions on iran. the, circumstances warrant. missilean's ballistic test last year, the administration did impose the sanctions. there was the right thing to do. the test was a violation of the un security council resolution governing the new deal. hamy continues to flow to as. hezbollah has stockpiled hundreds of rockets. hezbollah would not exist without iran. hezbollah has propped up that assad regime. shia militants in iraq and houthi fighters in yemen can still count on iran's support.
we have intercepted ship after weapons.ying iranian what is a plan to deal with these problems? how will the administration use the authority it already has? to makel congress do sure this administration and future administrations have all the tools they need? iran towe cmoompel change its behavior? i thank you all for your service and testimony. i yield back. >> we are pleased to be joined by a distinguished panel this morning. >> i request that the january report to be implemented into the record. by the leadined
nucleartor for iran implementation at the department of state and prior to his appointment, the ambassador served as ambassador to poland and as executive secretary for the state department. we have mr. thomas countryman, assistant secretary in the bureau of international security and nonproliferation. here's a career member of the senior foreign service. mr. countrymen recently served as deputy assistant secretary for european affairs. the acting undersecretary for the office of terrorism and financial intelligence at the department of the treasury. thereviously served as director of foreign assets control. we welcome all three of our witnesses back to the committee , all theut objection full prepared statement of these witnesses will be made part of the record. members here will have five
calendar days to submit statements or questions or any other extraneous material for the record. i will ask the ambassadors if they would please summarize the remarks. we will start with ambassador mull. be back: it's great to with you here again to talk about where we are in implementing what remains one of the highest priorities -- priorities of the obama administration. i'm happy to report today the fully implemented by all his participants according to its terms. it's important that we recognize what an accomplishment that is towards advancing not only our national security, but that of our closest friends and allies, particularly those in the middle east. because of our efforts to date and our success in this agreement, the security of the united states and our partners has been enhanced and in conversations for allies and partners around the world, he
regularly here support from our closest friends for this deal. poaf implementation day, jc had completed dozens of actions to limit, freeze, oral -- or rollback the program. that included shipping out iran'spounds, 98% of supply of enriched nuclear materials, cutting its centrifuge enrichment program by more than 2/3, and subjecting itself to tighten controls going forward, destroying the core of the iraq heavy reactor,and ofn's implementation of all these commitments increase the time it would take to produce enough missile material for a nuclear weapon, the so-called breakout time, from roughly two months to more than a year. these actions were complemented by the historically comprehensive verification and
monitoring measures specified in the jc poa. now subject to the greatest monitoring and verification regime in the history of nuclear power, providing us with confidence that if iran should seek to break out of its commitments, such an attempt with the detected and we would have ample time to respond. at the same time in this deal, we have preserved our ability to snap back penalties that made this deal possible in the first place. as of now, we have not had to take those measures of snapping back the penalties because iran is fully compliant with the terms of the deal as theiaea verified in february and as i expect it will again in his next report in the coming weeks. the exchange -- in exchange for iran's meeting its nuclear agreements, we lifted the so-called secondary sanctions on an effort to provide
greater clarity to the public and private sectors on what sanctions were lifted and what nonnuclear sanctions remain in place, we have been participating in outreach with the public and private sectors at the request of our foreign partners and foreign governments . as long as iran continues to meet its nuclear commitments, we will continue to meet our commitments on sanctions. while we are encouraged by iran's of the mentation less far, we have always recognize that the jcpoa not resolve all our concerns with iran and those concerns are every much active. the jcp oa is a spirit -- specifically aimed at addressing the issue of for five lee ensuring that iran does not have a nuclear weapon. we have made significant progress towards that goal, and the united states and our
partners remain safer because of those efforts. i look forward to your questions later on in the hearing. >> thank you, ambassador. mr. countryman? reuss,ntryman: chairman ranking member angle, members of the committee, i want to thank you for your service and in particular for this invitation. it's always an honor for me. ourssador mull laid out progress and successful implementation of the joint comprehensive program of action. my bureau is focused upon giving full support to those implementation activities -- and among a number of functions i would emphasize, helping to assure that the international atomic energy agency has the independence, the expertise and above all the resources needed for full implementation of the jcpoa. thanks to the support of congress, i'm happy to say that has sufficient
resources and expertise to do this mission. in the future, besides the iran mission, the iaea does a number of functions that are central to u.s. national security. look not only to this administration and congress, but future administrations and congresses to ensure that the iaea continues to have those important resources, both for implementation of this agreement, and the full range of its functions. in the interest of diligent, scrupulous implementation of the jcpoa, it would be extremely valuable for the senate to confirm a highly qualified individual, laura holt date, to be our full-time confirmed ambassador to the u.n. missions in vienna. while the threat of a nuclear has been addressed through this agreement, we recognize like every previous
arms-control agreement negotiated by any administration, and arms control agreement does not change the full range of behavior of the partner or adversary with whom we are negotiating. there remains a need as chairman to ranking member have noted address the full range of serious misbehavior by the .ranian regime the particular responsibility of my bureau is to address the ballistic missile program of iran as well as a number of other proliferation related efforts in the conventional field as well. we do this through the rigorous , byementation of sanctions designating in partnership with the department of treasury, those entities in iran responsible for the weapons program. and we have designated every associatedy in iran with the ballistic missiles program. we will continue to do so as new
information becomes available. at the same time i will give you my personal opinion, it is not iran resolutions or designations to sanctions that cause iran trade its calculus and interest in the ballistic missile program. but what we can do to slow and deter and make their missile choices painfully expensive to rigorousan regime is enforcement of strategic trade control. we do that not only in partnership with a wide range of u.s. agencies, but in partnership with more than 40 countries under the missile technology control regime, with more than 100 partners under the proliferation security initiative, and as a result, all the legally binding restrictions on missile technology for a run that are contained in you and resolutions are successfully , not to the point of
preventing iran from a continued interest in these programs. view, we bureau's per work closely with our regional partners, including the corporation counsel and israel to bolster their defenses military continuing threat from iran. we have no intention of reducing our focus on iran's other programs, even as we continue with the successful implementation of the jcpoa. thank you, and i look forward to your questions. forszubin: thank you inviting me to appear today to
discuss our implementation of the joint comprehensive plan of action, the jcpoa. very soon after i joined the treasury department in 2004, we saw with alarm the progress that iran is making in its covert nuclear program and understood this was a national security threat of the highest order. from that time, the talented women and men in my office have devoted literally tens of thousands of hours to address this threat. working with the intelligence community to identify and track iranian front companies and their movements of funds through hidden accounts. working with law enforcement and regulators to hold sanctions violators accountable. working with diplomats and foreign counterparts to make clear to iran that the price of their nuclear program was complete isolation from the international community. congressng with you in
in a bipartisan effort to sharpen our sanctions tools, deepen their impact, and bring iran to the table. after nearly a decade, the accumulated pressure had its intended effect. the rainy and people rejected the course of government had charted and elected president rouhani. was a tremendous breakthrough. it represents a peaceful solution to what had been one of the world's most serious national security threats. iran was a few months away from having enough potential for nuclear weapons. now iran's breakout time has been extended to beyond a year. since iran has kept its and of the deal, we must uphold hours. it is in our national security interest to ensure that jcpoa stands the test of time. it is important that we fulfill all the commitments we made in the deal. iran is already seeing benefits
under this deal. it's been able to open new bank accounts straight is been able to gain access to billions of dollars in reserves and its oil exports to europe have recovered to about 1/2 of their pre-sanctions level. around theies, banks world continue to have concerns about doing business in iran. some are concerned about their financial transparency. others are noting concerns about corruption as well as regulatory and other obstacles to conducting business in iran others -- iran, and still others as side of behavior the nuclear file. as president obama said recently, iran has to understand what every country in the world understands, which is that businesses want to go where they feel safe, where they don't see massive controversy. as iran pursues more business,
it is incumbent on iran to address such problems, undertake meaningful reforms and create an environment in which businesses feel secure. i talked a bit about the sanctions relief i have delivered, but i also want to be clear about what this deal does not mean. with certain limited exceptions, the primary u.s. embargo on iran remains in place, including prohibitions on u.s. persons investing in iran and prohibitions on iran accessing u.s. markets and banks. we have not promised, nor do we have any intent to give iran access to the u.s. financial system or reinstate the u-turn authorization. we have maintained all of our sanctions designed to counter iran's maligned activities outside of the nuclear file. iran continues to be the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and to play a negative role in destabilizing the region. under our current sanctions regime, we have designated more than 200 and rainy and linked
firms and individuals on nonnuclear grounds. that also includes major iranian defense and missile entities, as noted by assistant secretary countryman, which are behind iran's current new prayer work. since implementation of the jcpoa, we have continued to target new irani and actors, including key supporters of their ballistic missile program. indeed, i can tell you that after many years of targeting hezbollah, today the group is in its worst financial shape in decades. ultimately we will remain clear eyed about the nature of the threat posed by iran and we will continue to combat these threats using the range of tools at our disposal, including our sanctions, and by designating
new targets as appropriate. i want to thank this committee for inviting me to appear today and i look forward to our continued work. >> i do appreciate your work in terms of targeting hezbollah. this logician -- legislation that eliot engel and i and the committee passed in december to the president's desk, and your implementation of that is appreciated. thatoted in her testimony the united states has in your words, no plans to give iran access to the u.s. financial system. i appreciate that clarification. however, that hasn't been the source of our concern. does the united states have any plans to offer iran the ability to access off-shore dollar clearing facilities to allow for dollar denominated transactions runs to trade
internationally, or are there plans for the administration to allow iranians to conduct large-scale dollar-denominated transactions and dollar clearing in any form? your testimony studiously avoided that question. let me put that to you. i welcome the chance to clarify an area that has been the subject of confusion and concern. our primary sanctions in the u.s. control what u.s. actors can do and what they cannot do. it governs the conduct of u.s. actors anywhere they reside in the world. a branch of the u.s. bank in europe and east asia has to behave like a u.s. person here in washington or here in new york. our sanctions on the other hand do not control the actions of non-us persons. theyer or not the currency
are using is the dollar, the euro, pound or the yen, to be very specific, every foreign bank in the world has u.s. dollars in their possession. it is the international currency of choice for international trade. banks in europe, japan, china will have dollars in their vaults. our sanctions don't extend to those dollar bills straight foreign actors are not under our jurisdiction if they choose to .ive those to any actor i want to be clear as to the contours of our jurisdiction in terms of off-shore dollar figuring. >> that seems to have a different intent than the response the treasury secretary gave me when i asked him on the financial services committee this question. i asked the treasury secretary if he stood by his testimony during the agreement's consideration, which we were assured they would not have access.
instead of shutting the door right there, secretary lou said his focus was on making sure iran gets relief. two months since, the president still has not responded to my letter on this question. there's been ample time for the administration to bring clarity to this question, and the concern is that while iran would not be allowed direct access to the dollar, you could structure a scheme off-shore that would have similar impact. you, it isnd treasury yourself that has declared the entire territory of primary money laundering concern. that means any financial transaction with iran or any off-shore scheme that is set up risks supporting the regime's ongoing illicit activities, including ballistic missile
activities and everything else. let me go to a question for assistant secretary countryman. is pushing this, right? i read the translations of the iranian papers. i see what they are pushing for. but go ahead. lou hasin: secretary made himself clear on the record in public, and we look forward to responding to your letter to be clear in writing as well. he has said exactly what i've said here today. i know he was looking forward to me being here to be able to relay his views on this. iran will not have access to our financial system. >> perfectly fair, but when i asked him the question the fus was on making sure iran gets relief. let me go to the next question. this is to assistant secretary countryman. and your testimony, you put
stock in the new un security council resolution 231, and its provisions related to iran's ballistic missile program. it's well documented that before the deal, iran was legally bound by u.n. security council resolutions not to test ballistic missiles. here's the problem and negotiation. administration agreed to a change. instead of saying shall not, the change was iran shall be called upon not to. that was watered down. theirs other language in that focuses on iranian missiles designed -- and this is something i missed -- designed to be capable of delivering
nuclear weapons, well it previously focused on missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons. what was the rationale for using the words missile designed to be capable of instead of simply, missiles capable of? if i could ask that. i don't know the answer. i will get you an answer if i can. does notesolution 2231 change the substantive prohibition on provision of any kind of ballistic missile technology to iran. iranian foreign saying that word in these saidiations design -- he it took me seven months to negotiate. everyone knew what it meant. what they are saying now is with the change, iran shall be called upon not to rather than not to, that they can go forward full speed withir