system, writing and doing report for unicef and the public affairs for the u.n. before she became your president. i'd say i have watched _i'd lika couple times as nuchhi has revitalized the moment national democratic club and put it back to the hub of debate and dialogue certainly enjoyed during its heyday with eleanor roosevelt. so i know trinh said will be leaving in turning over the presidency to the next president in the first to introduce me. just a final note, and that's great, great grandmother -- great-grandmother whispers of, eleanor roosevelt. statute cannot into nuchhi, with i.q. ought to join me in welcoming and most delightful woman. [applause] >> that's the kindest introduction i've ever had here. thank you so much, when he. downstairs i have a few blog posts i've done on the election. you can read them. they're in great detail and depth. little bits and pieces from them. i want to start out with the fact about what really happened in this election. the facts usually pakistan are little hazy in a little fudgy and a little hard to come by. so this wa

of the two weeks around then-secretary of state general colin powell giving his push for war at the u.n., february 5, 2003. a speech he would later call, general powell would later call a stain on his career. that speech was the final nail in the coffin for so many, because he had been hesitant about the war, so he had a great deal of credibility. and he said, yes, the evidence was in. there was, there were -- there was final proof that there were weapons of mass destruction. f.a.i.r. did a study to have two weeks around that address and looked at the abc world news tonight, cbs evening news, nbc nightly news and the pbs "newshour". in that two-week period six weeks before the occupation, this was extremely significant because this was the period when americans are making up their minds. about half the population was for the war, half opposed to war. in those two weeks, there were 393 interviews done around war in the four major nightly newscasts. guess how many were with anti-war leaders? well, you figure, you know, half the population for, half against, maybe 200, 150. three. three of

same reason you're not going to get reform of the u.n. security council. any reform has winners and losers and shockingly enough, the losers will resist it. i ended up thinking it made sense to traffic in put up these thoughts. i do think there's one or two ways things could turn out better. one is the way i fear, which is only after a crisis have essentially business as usual is no longer sustainable. the problem is we pay an enormous collective price for the crisis. this is not the way any of you should want things to happen. the alternative is something of a new majority or plurality for reforms we need. i think aker, about for leadership willing to willing to in some ways combine the best of fdr, the fireside chats for policy reform and lyndon johnson and some good retail politics to bring it about. it's a longshot? are. is it possible? definitely. no way have they given up. americans can be counted on to do the right thing, but only after they've tried everything else. the real question for me is whether we get time before the crisis forces us to unde

same reason you're not going to get reform of the u.n. security council. any reform has winners and losers and shockingly enough, the losers will resist it. i ended up thinking it made sense to traffic in put up these thoughts. i do think there's one or two ways things could turn out better. one is the way i fear, which is only after a crisis have essentially business as usual is no longer sustainable. the problem is we pay an enormous collective price for the crisis. this is not the way any of you should want things to happen. the alternative is something of a new majority or plurality for reforms we need. i think aker, about for leadership willing to willing to in some ways combine the best of fdr, the fireside chats for policy reform and lyndon johnson and some good retail politics to bring it about. it's a longshot? are. is it possible? definitely. no way have they given up. americans can be counted on to do the right thing, but only after they've tried everything else. the real question for me is whether we get time before the crisis forces us to unde

i write about this, and i was just giving a speech at the the u.n. the fact that so many news organizations, um, in the time when half the population was opposed to war, the four major nightly newscasts -- abc, nbc, cbs and the pbs "newshour" -- two weeks around paul giving his push at the u.n., he was secretary of the tate at the time -- state at the time, it was a final nail in the coffin for so many because he'd been so respected for dragging his feet on war saying is the evidence in. but on that day, february 5, 2003, six weeks before the invasion, he said the evidence is in. and that swayed so many. but, you know, the population was wided. and -- divided. and these newscasts were so important at this time. they set the agenda. 393 interviews done around war in that two week period on those four newscasts. would we expect, 200, 150 would be with people for the war and against the war? no, three against the war. three anti-war leaders of almost 400 interviews. no longer mainstream media. it's an extreme media beating the drums for war. we know in

were 8000 muslims were killed in mass occurred and it is the biggest failure and embarrassment for the u.n. who failed to protect them after promising. the women were rape and displaced and now some of the women came back. the only survivors came back. i asked her, what triggers you to come back? she said i came back in spite. i came back in spite of seeing my brothers being tortured and seen his eyes pop off the. i came back in spite of being forced to clean the floors and ceilings from blood and the concentration in rape camps. i came back in spite of seeing another spring burst open. i came back in spite to tell them that i am still alive and with me this story exists and that will not die. do you have any other questions? the story has learned from bosch and many other women is the most thing that we have. each person has their own story. in my case each woman has her own story. we have a choice. we have a choice of either keeping a secret and out of the story to ourselves because were embarrassed and ashamed and worried about people's judgment or breaking the silence and telling our s

there was a u.n. arms embargo in bosnia, and that essentially froze in place the military advantage of the bosnian serbs. we armed the croatians and bosnians secretly. it was gains on the ground by croatian and bosnian forces that ended that war. and i know it will lead to more bloodshed in the short term, but i think that, you know, arming the rebels will end the stalemate there. >> my understanding is that qatar and saudi arabia are arming the rebels. >> the rebels have claimed, and it's been lifted now, but the americans were limiting the type of weapons that could go in. they did not want sophisticated weapons go in. we're trying to, i think, vet who's getting these sophisticated weapons, but we really were limiting what kind of weapon was going in. and they've had lots of small arms and rpgs, but they needed more sophisticated stuff to deal with syrian armor and those kind of things. to me, it's you arm and arm fully, or you don't arm. not sort of half and half. thank you all very much. again, i

and that is i don't know the level of responsibility that u.n. the president bear for this scandal but i know it's not zero and i think the american people would like to hear a little bit more from you and the president that the buck stops here as opposed to hear no evil, see no evil and i know nothing, and that may just a little bit of unsolicited advice so i'm not going to look retrospectively. i'm going to look prospectively. i know you have seen the forms that the irs has sense to american citizens. the irs now reports to you mr. secretary and as for the last two and a half months. so i've looked through these forms and i find out where the irs is asking american citizens for all of their goodies both facebook and twitter including hard copies of all advertising or social media. under your watch will it be appropriate for irs agents to ask this? >> mr. chairman i take responsibility for the management of the treasury department and the management and oversight of the irs. there is a difference between general management oversight and the very

one is entitled -- "washington post," "iran paves over suspected nuclear testing site despite u.n. protest." the second is another "washington post" associated press, "iran expands new technology for program that could be used to make weapons." and of course it's of interesting, another one, "iranian soldiers fighting for assad in syria." i would ask unanimous consent that they be made part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. mccain: i join with 90 members of the senate to support this resolution. this resolution has extraordinary bipartisan support. the senate will send a clear and unequivocal message to the regime in tehran, and that is this: the united states will not allow you to get a nuclear weapons capability. the dangers of a nuclear iran cannot be denied, diminished or dismissed. we must continue to ratchet up pressure through sanctions as this resolution suggests. but at the end of the day sanctions are a means to an end, not an end unto themselves. and unfortunately, despite the unprecedented international sanctions that have been put

much attention has been paid to the internal white house e-mails and changes to the u.n. ambassador susan rice's talkingpoints explaining the source of the attack. i believe that a key question still remains to be answered. why for two weeks did the administration propagate the tale that it was a youtube video-inspired attack when officials knew almost immediately that it was cared out by afil affiliates of al qa? that's a prist simple question. -- that's a pretty simple question. why were the american people told that an antii anti-islam ye video prompted the attack when it is known at that it did not? no one -- no one, mr. president, has answered this very basic question. instead of providing answers to these questions, a top white house advisor has impugned the integrity of those seeking the truth by decrying persistent questioning as a witch-hunt. it is time for the president to put politics aside, demand accountability from his staff, step up and do his job. congress is doing its part by conducting serious oversight hearings on both the i.r.s. overreach and the bengh

do with the iranians i talked to, members of the cabinet from the people who were ambassador to the u.n. but there are elements within iran that almost want to create a sense of desperation and anxiety. it helps them domestically, make them look like they're really radical and of course it terrifies those people outside the country who are worried that something will happen. so what should we do? first of all, we are doing the right thing by trying to convince israel no attac iran at this point. but we need to really get something going that some alternative to a major attack. here it is and this is the best i can do. secretary schultz approved. henry kissinger has written a blurb on the back. he approves the idea. i'd like to see the united states try it. in the meantime if were going to do that, i would really hope israel does not attack iran because that is going to lead to an ongoing dynamic between these two countries. who knows when it would end even if there is no nuclear war, there would be an ongoing war of terrorism. it would just multiply the problems israel faces

they draw an analogy between the daily irritations and from government bureaucrats and rules and a u.n. conspiracy to remake american businesses, put in every house that are going to regulate the temperature for you. we couldn't figure out where that came from, and then vanessa went through the fox news transcript and there it was. many of the tea partyers that we talked to told us they watch fox news six to eight hours a day. so i think there was a big push about the time we were doing our interviews to get a certain scary image of environmentalism out there, and we can report it was working. >> all right. well, on that note, thank you for takenning. it was a wonderful discussion, and -- [applause] there's a reception upstairs, and they'll be signing books, on the second floor here. [inaudible conversations] >> coming up next, elizabeth liz price foley talks about her book "tea party: three principles." >> i am delighted to introduce you to our last author, elizabeth price foley who has written book on at the tea party. you make the tea partyhahey tea party is not a party, it's a move

much to do with the iranians i talked to, members of the cabinet, people who were ambassador to the u.n. but they are elements within iran that i most want to create a sense of desperation and anxiety. it helps them domestically, made them look like they were really radical and terrify associate the day the country who are worried something will happen. so what should we do? first of all, we do the right thing by trying to convince israel not to attack iran at this point. but we need to really get something going back to some alternative to a major attack. here it is. the best i can get a secretary shows approved of it. henry kissinger has a blurb on the back. he approves of the idea. i'd like to see the united states try it. in the meantime you for going do that, i really hope israel does not attack iran because that is going to lead to an ongoing dynamic of entity between these two countries. ..

the e-mail says hey our u.n. office? i respond, should i be? and they respond, you might want to be in the office. so i respond, can it wait until halftime? the responses you might want to be in the office. that of course is the day that lehman brothers was about to go into bankruptcy and also the day that bank of america bought out merrill lynch and the day that wall street change forever. it events that followed an ugly weeks of the fall of 2008 have been chronicled in a lot of books and history. it's aig and the tarp and all these ugly payloads and all of this economic calamity happening at that time. i'm going to focus on a couple of aspects you might not know about that are important in understanding this in a global level. in the 19s the central bankers didn't understand each other and didn't communicate and act with common assault. that a change by 2008 in by the time 2008 rolls around there is very much a sense of common purpose among these guys. they meet six times a year. they go to basle switzerland. they have two days of meetings in

people's party government until he decided he would advise against taking the benazir bhutto case to the u.n. and there's a parting of ways. maybe has a different explanation. thus the public discourse on hand. he said that even a number of dialects, in the name of the military to military dialogue. he will be with us and then we have our own sub one. use at the the imf ms works close way with pakistan in previous government advising them on specific issues for mass for it by. but at a circuit at the atlantic council. we thought it would be critical to look at the economic challenges facing pakistan and get a season person on board. let me just say on my part a lot has been said about the elections and the conventional wisdom in a watershed election that will change everything. in my personal view it's very important. the turnout was so historic proportion, which was the last so-called competitive elections in pakistan. the end result you know wasn't very good for pakistan. i lost half the country. this time it's different to miss an opportunity to build on this. however, some interesting th

and continued under the pakistan daily decided that they would advise against taking the case to the u.n. and there was the parting of ways. maybe he has a different explanation for it then the public discourse on him. he has been very well so a number of dialogs, including the ones that are center is involved in, military to military dialogue. so we are delighted he is in washington and he would be with that. a number have a room senior fellow at the middle east center. boston was director of the middle east central asia department at the imf and has worked very close late with pakistan, particularly the previous government on a number of issues come advising them on specific issues. but now his circuit at the atlantic council. we thought it would be critical to take a look at the economic challenges in pakistan and to get a season on the board. so let me just say a lot has been said about the elections. a lot of the conventional wisdom that this is a watershed election, that is going to change everything. and my personal view, it is very important. the turnout was historic proportions,

we then had the u.n. enterprises that are on the korean peninsula to keep the people of the republic of korea free. vietnam war, very, very dramatic and important in american history. and then today, you know, we face the issues with taiwan, our relationship with japan, and present a republic of korea. so it's always been a pretty important issue set for the united states. on the other hand, it's also always been taken for granted, to a degree. admittedly, america has for a long time been a very eurocentric nation. you know, we have worried about that. we faced the soviet union in europe. when i was a young lieutenant that's where everyone was focused. then the middle east, things like 9/11, which we're now totally focused their and still remaining that way. so in a certain way the administration's so-called pivot towards asia is very much overdue. and we should celebrate the concept of doing that. i mean, the portion of the world's population that happens to be in asia is enormous. the markets that are t

but we are not relying on the u.n. alone. we are pursuing a gathering information independently and working with our allies and most importantly the syrian opposition. i don't have the depth of information about the progress being made to assess whether the report you said about the evidence available, whether or not that is the case. i know we have been for some time now work in in an effort to build on the intelligence community's assessment about the use of chemical weapons to make sure we have a case, if you will, a set of facts i can be cooperated and reviewed and from which we can make assessments about possible policy actions. even as that takes place, as you have seen at the direction of the president, we have stepped up our humanitarian assistance. we have stepped up our assistance to the syrian opposition. we've made systems available directly to the military council of the opposition. we have stepped it up in that process of constantly assessing the options available to us in the situation, assessing the ways we pr

they don't like the u.n. security council voting on sanctions against them for their military activities. and i think the same thing is true in terms of the commission of inquiry. i think we continue to document, we continue to establish the facts, and there's a growing sense that north korea is out of step with the rest of the nations in the world. and i think this commission of inquiry is part of that process. the economists intelligence unit produces reports periodically. they did a report on freedom, what countries have the greatest amounts of freedom, who are the best countries in terms of human rights and so forth. they went through a process of giving numerical values to certain kinds of criteria, and then ranking all of the nations of the earth as to how they stand on human rights. the united states was in the 20s. north korea, there were 167 countries in the study and north korea was 167. now, no matter what your country is, that's not a good place to be. and i think we need to continue that effort.

we operate on the basis of a u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. pan kate to insure -- mandate to insure free movement -- [inaudible conversations] [laughter] >> you asked me about afghanistan. there is a clear road map. by the end of 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission. but we will stay after 2014 with a noncombat be mission, a training mission to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisek asked me when we do anything to stop cuts in defense budgets. as you know, international decision. they toe as an alliance can't interfere with that. that's a national decision. we have a men be. mark according to which -- a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated that those allies that spent more than 2%, on defense commit themselves to stay above the 2% while those allies below 2% will try to work towards 2% benchmark. it's not a legal requirement, it's a political obligation. and whenever i visit capitals -- and soon i will visit warsaw -- i will repeat that message. and, actually, i can tell you that

that would take agreement among the five permanent members of the u.n. security council. the only way forward is a political solution. but to that end, we need a strong and unified message from the international community. mr. glick asked me whether the so-called u.s. pivot to asia will weaken t transatlantic relationship. my brief answer is that will very much depend on us, the europeans. i think it's in our interests that the u.s. rebalance its interests and focus a bit more on the asia pacific region taking into account the rising powers in that region. but if we are to insure that the americans still find europe relevant as a partner, the europeans must also invest in that transatlantic relationship politically, economically and militarily. that's my point. i was asked pretty much the same question, would this u.s. pivot to asia downgrade nato? no, not in itself. but, of course, if the europeans don't invest in the transatlantic relationship, it may, it may weaken that bond. but actually we have seen a strong u.s. commitment to european security. for instance, the u.s

but in order to use something like u.n. membership of going to the international criminal court, or any other diplomatic or other tool at your disposal, you have to have a strategy. i have seen the slightest inkling of a stretch from palestinian politician four years. what are they doing? whether complex are they going to get the? i just don't see the. i see nothing in anything they see -- say, anything they do that if it were up to me, i would be trying to increase resistance on the ground to this grinding annexation and occupation process. i would be trying to increase pressure external in by, i don't know where you go are what where you go out what to where you go are what you do but there are many things you can do, and i would say, this is a process that was supposed, going to the letter of assurances which i have right here, u.s. letter of assurances, invitation to the peace conference which have right ere, these tattered copies ideas back in 1991. this process was supposed to end in 1997. they interacted was supposed

we operate on the basis of u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. mandate to insure free movement. [inaudible conversations] [laughter] you asked me about afghanistan. there's a clear road map. by the end of 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission. but we will stay after 2014 with a noncombat mission, a training mission to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisyk asked me whether we do anything to stop cuts in defense budgets. of as you know, the it's a national decision. nato as an alliance can't interfere with that. that's a national decision. we have a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated that those allies that spent more than 2%, 2% or more on defense, commit themselves to stay above the 2 percent. while those allies below 2% will try to work towards the 2% benchmark. it's not a legal requirement, it's a political obligation. and whenever i visit capitals -- and soon i will visit warsaw -- i will repeat that message. and, actually, i can tell you that i have had political, a political d

we operate on the basis of the u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. mandate, to ensure free movement. you asked me about afghanistan. that in 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission, but we will stay after 2014 to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisette asked me whether we do anything to stop cuts and defense budgets. as you know, international decision as a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated those allies that spent more than 2%, 2% or more on defense commit themselves to stay above the 2% while those will try to work towards the 2%. it's not a legal requirement. it's a political obligation. whenever i visit capitals and soon i will visit, i will repeat that message. and i can tell you i've had political dialogue with governments, but also with parliamentarians in some capitals. i have seen a positive response. i can mention one country in which the main political parties have reached a broad political agreement according to which they will now move gradually toward 2%. so that his life

so far the u.n. security council has failed to reach a consensus i strongly regret because i do believe we have a political framework that could be used as an june 2012, the so-called action group in syria issued a statement of declaration, signed by all five permanent members of the u.n. security council. in that statement, it is clearly stated the regime in damascus should initiate a process of transition leading to accommodation of legitimate aspirations of the syrian people. i do believe a solution could be based on that declaration. too bad and of course negates u.n. security council resolution. now mr. burkett asked me about the good. they have made substantial progress. this is the reason we have granted a membership action plan. they do not fulfill the necessary criteria, but i am quite impressed by the work done and the progress achieved. but there's a political statement. a couple years ago, we granted a condition based membership action plan. we have declared we are willing to activate tha

this working dialogue between the u.n. that was established several years ago is working dialogue. working dialogue without special relation center for everybody, i believe, it should be maintained for the benefit of european union and nay tow -- nato. [inaudible] and my third remarking, about necessary corporation between the both institutions but also for abilities of particular -- [inaudible] especially in the -- [inaudible] and smart defense. to what extent you can say that it -- [inaudible] it should be harmonized in the progress of both. thank you very much. >> translator: thank you for that very interesting speech. you said nato was a unique transatlantic forum. and there's no doubt about that. what i think is most encouraging is that nato has concentrated on the new challenges of cybersecurity and the like. and yet, there's a general view that nato is -- the u.s.a. turning in on itself has to, some extend downgraded nato. my question to you is, to what extend is the united states now less interested in europe. and my second question -- [inaudible] and the european enthusias

the u.n. is doing a great job. they are running out of money. jordan is about to fall if we don't stop this war. from a human point of view, senator mccain, we have got to get this war over and america needs to be seen as part of the solution, not part of the problem. from a national security point of view, syria is going to become a nightmare for the whole world, including the united states. mr. mccain: i thank my colleague. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to include in the record a piece by senator casey called time to act in syria. it was in the huffington post, "washington post" editorial entitled repercussions of inaction, "wall street journal" article u.s. has warned planned syria arms sale, and finally a syria arms sale, and finally a >> the situation in afghanistan and 78 and 79 was just how different it was from what we face today. many things are radically different. there are no radical leftist parties or secular parties at afghanistan today. that has all been pretty much wiped out but in the 1970s those were the powerful force

the u.n. is doing a great job. they are running out of money. jordan is about to fall if we don't stop this war. from a human point of view, senator mccain, we have got to get this war over and america needs to be seen as part of the solution, not part of the problem. from a national security point of view, syria is going to become a nightmare for the whole world, including the united states. mr. mccain: i thank my colleague. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to include in the record a piece by senator casey called time to act in syria. it was in the huffington post, "washington post" editorial entitled repercussions of inaction, "wall street journal" article u.s. has warned planned syria arms sale, and finally a piece by leon wieseltier that is in "the new republic." the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: i thank my colleagues. i yield. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 601 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 44, 601, a

. >> between a group of u.n. the president. >> in this town nothing happens behind closed doors which is okay. this needs to be something that is transparent. at the end of the day this will affect the lives of millions of americans in fundamental ways so it is going to be a process, patty murray will be involved, paul ryan will be involved and it requires a presidential leadership. if you look back whether it is tax reform 86 or whether it is social security reform 83 the last two examples where we did something significant to improve the economy and deal with what seemed to be a huge debt and deficit problem which by the way seems small relative to what we have not always involve presidential leadership. it must. the president had ultimately been in support in order to have it become effective and inactive but the resources of management and budget and the treasury department are critical to this. the president has got to step up and show leadership. >> do you believe he started? >> in a small way and that is i

the u.n. system to adapt and in developing close and cooperative bilateral relationships across the globe. but cooperation, too, requires investment in diplomacy, in technical assistance and helping friendly countries do a better job of defending against common threats. according to surveys, the average american thinks that we give about a quarter of our tax dollars to foreigners. terrible. the truth is that our entire international affairs budget including everything from the protection of our ambassadors to emergency food for refugees is equal to about 1%. i don't know about you, but i am fed up with politicians who demand a strong america and then vote to deprive our diplomats of the tools they need to protect and advance our interests. and that's why our country should have a comprehensive national security budget that will enable us not only to wage war, but also to preserve peace and to lead both on the battlefield and at the bargaining table. our second imperative is education. the tech

yes, again, fruit is a healthy buzzword that the ngdustry is putting out there, i especially to pull u.n., as presenting these two kids and as but wh have ave for sugar? uestnd 11 grams. that is more than: 2 tablespoo. that is significant.are >> one of the fascinating things [lau about chips, and i really think this is so interesting because y love potato chips. cou i couldn't figure out why they induce such incredible cravings and people. we know that the salt is right there on the surface of the the chips, providing what the industry calls the flavor bursts.dialls your saliva races to theinto pleasure center of the brain, which sends the signals. and they say, okay, let's get o more of that. we know that the senses are soae soaked with that. and that gives the pleasurable feeling. races the chips are also loaded with h sugar, a convertito starch itself, which begins to convert to sugar thet instant it hits your tongue. so you have the holy trinity yoe there of salt and sugar and fat, all interacting.duct, but but just just make you like the potter product but to make you want more and

a u.n. arms embargo which essentially froze in place the military advantage of the bosnian serbs. we armed the croatians and the bosnian secretly. there were gains on the ground, not magical american airstrikes. i know it will lead to more bloodshed in the short term, but i think that arming the rebels will end the stalemate there. >> qatar and saudi arabia are our men. >> the rebels have claimed -- and it has been lifted now, but the americans were limiting the types of weapons that could go in. they did not want sophisticated weapons going in. new american effort. that is getting these more sophisticated weapons. we really were limiting what kind of weapon was going in. they have had lots of small arms and our peas that any more sophisticated step to deal with syrian armor and those kinds of things. to me it is your arm and arm fully or you don't arm. not sort of half and half. think you very much. again -- [applause] i appreciate all the questions and it's good to have this conversation. thank you. >> while we were in arizona, book tv with the help of our local cable partner ti

just google the u.n. got the google. what made him say you lie was the reference that barack obama, president obama may to the fact that health care this law was not going to be readily available and easily acceptable to anybody in this country illegally. if you're here illegally -- so you're not going to get, it's not available for those who are here illegally and the cards and jumped up and said july. why do i raised that? i raise it because of all the things that barack obama said in that speech that this republican congressman had to disagree with, the thing that really got his eye was the very idea that the president would dare say that this is not going to happen with this card says your life. we know it is and we're going to fight against it. so years ago this health issue already has this color-coded notion connected to it. it's in the past. now going forward you've got a senator who is suggesting that you shouldn't healthier on the other side of this citizenship fight. talk to me about health care and where we'r

concerned at the emerging evidence of the use of chemical weapons, and we demand that the regime allow the u.n. to investigate these allegations. assad should be in no doubt that the world is watching and will hold him to account, him and anyone else to account who is found responsible for the use of chemical weapons. as we face up to these security challenges and those posed by iran, we also face significant budget constraints, both in london and in washington. secretary hagel and i have addressed the issue of defense reform and how we can get more bang for our buck on both sides of the atlantic. greater military cooperation is at the heart of this, and we also need to look at how we can encourage our partner countries within european nato to reform their forces to take on more of the security challenge with more effective and deployable forces. of course, the u.k. and the u.s. already enjoy a very high level of cooperation and interoperability, but we have agreed to explore what more we can do in our armed forces to drive greater efficiencies through collaboration together. yesterday, as sec