links suggested by our guests today. we hope all of you have a safe rest of your memorial day weekend. up next for our viewers here in the united states, "fareed zakaria: gps." this is "gps," the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we have a great show for you today. as you know, the big question mark in the arab world remains saudi arabia. will the central banker of oil be the next one to face revolt and revolution? a fascinating conversation with the 26th richest man in the world, saudi prince al waleed. later, who says only mother nature can make rain? we'll explain.

but first up -- the chances of peace in the middle east after the latest round of speeches by prime minister netanyahu and president obama. i'll be joined by tom friedman of "the new york times" who is just back from the middle east. now, here's my take for this week. we've just gone through an arcane debate about whether barack obama said anything new when he called for an israeli/palestinian settlement based on 1967 borders with mutually agreed upon land swaps. in fact, that has been the working assumption of all negotiating parties, america, israel and the palestinian authority, for over 20 years. it is what the camp david talks of 2000 were based on. it's what elmerit's talks were based on. the real shift in u.s. policy was president obama publicly condemning the palestinian strategy to seek recognition as a state from the u.n. general assembly in september. instead of thanking obama for this, prime minister netanyahu

chose to stage, in the words of the former israeli diplomat, pinkus, quote, nothing less than a bizarre tirade at the white house on friday, educating the president about the plight and the problems of jews throughout history, end quote. so why did netanyahu do this? does it help israel's security or strengthen it otherwise to stoke tensions with its strongest ally and largest benefactor, washington? does such behavior further the resolution of israel's problems? no. but it helps netanyahu stir up support at home and maintain his fragile coalition. the real revelation, which has been picked up by many in the israeli press, is that it shows finally that netanyahu simply doesn't want a deal. he always has a new objection, a new problem, a new delaying tactic, because at core, he has never believed that the palestinians should have a state.

here is the young bibi 33 years ago at a forum in cambridge, massachusetts. >> i think the united states should oppose the creation of a palestinian state for several reasons, the first one being that it is unjust to demand the creation of a 22nd arab state and a second palestinian state. at the expense of the only jewish state. there is no right to establish the second one on my doorstep which will threaten my existence. there is no right whatsoever. >> prime minister netanyahu's references to the indefensible borders of 1967 last week also reveal him to be mired in a world that has really gone away, the chief threat to israel today is not from a palestinian army. israel has the region's strongest economy and military by far complete with an arsenal of nuclear weapons. the chief threats to israel are from new technologies, rockets, biological weapons, and from demography. its physical existence is less in doubt than its democratic

existence as it continues to rule millions of palestinians who are entitled to beneath err vote nor a country. ironically, the young bibi understood that it was impossible to keep the palestinians in such serflike conditions forever. listen to him advocating that palestinians should be given citizenship, either in jordan or in israel. >> in the event that this negotiation process will continue, i am sure that what we're talking about is, in fact, eventual citizenship of some kind, either jordanian or israeli or any other arrangement. >> if the palestinians were smart, they'd take the prime minister up on citizenship in israel, and then bibi would wish he'd been for a two-state solution all along. let's get started. so what does it look like to

thomas friedman, the author of "from beirut to jerusalem," winner of two pulitzer prizes, "new york times" columnist. tom, this week, whatever criticisms you may have or i may have, bibi netanyahu goes back to israel and he's hail adhere row. >> there's no question when you stand up to foreign power, you inassert your demands, there's going to be a constituency that's going to support that. it's good work if you can get it. but what happens next week? i think we have to step back and really ask the big strategic question, why is israel popular? why has this been an enduring relationship all these years? why is that cameraman and that sound person support israel, whether they're jewish or not jewish? it's because we see them like us, we see them as a country that shares our values. and most importantly, we see israel as a bastion of democracy in the middle east. that's israel's greatest strategic strength vis-a-vis the united states. and what those of us who have been critical of prime minister

netanyahu on this issue are basically saying is that's precisely what is imperilled if there is no peace agreement that allows israel to cede the west bank to a palestinian authority in a safe and secure way so it doesn't absorb all those palestinians so we don't end up with a situation where a jewish minority is ruling over an arab majority between the mediterranean and the jordan river. we know where that goes. that's called jewish apartheid. that would be the biggest strategic threat to israel. and the way you know that is if you look at the strategy of hamas, hezbollah and iran. what is their strategy? it is to make sure israel must never leave the west bank. okay? because as long as israel's there, that is the key to their strategy for globally delegitimizing israel. why play into that strength? >> he gets 29, 28 standing ovations in congress. >> you know, there's a parallel between what the palestinians could get at the u.n. and what the israelis can get in congress. they can both stand up and read the phone book and be assured that a bunch of knuckleheads in

the audience will stand and give them a standing ovation. so, but let's think about how bb bibby could have gotten a standing ovation. that would also have been in his long-term interest. let's say bibi had stood before congress and said, you know, my fellow friends and my american friends, your president, president obama, has come to me and said that he believes that there's an opportunity here to break through with the palestinians. i have to tell you, i personally don't believe it. but i know one thing. when our best friend, our oldest ally, our most important strategic partner in the world, comes to me and makes the request, there's only one right answer. mr. president, yes. you want a six-month moratorium on settlement building? i've already got 500,000 settlers in jerusalem and the west bank. you know what, mr. president? that's not really a strategic risk for me. the potential payoff of that is so great, i don't believe it. i'm skeptical. but when you, president obama, ask me that, there's only one right answer. yes, sir.

we will do that. barack obama, this bud's for you. then he would have gotten a standing ovation that would have not just included the u.s. congress, it would have included europeans. it would have included arabs. it would have included people all over america who said hey, there's a guy who's going the extra mile. and that's my point, fareed. i have no idea whether there is a palestinian partner for a secure peace with israel. along the lines of president clinton has laid out. i just know one thing. given the implications for israel, if it gets stuck permanently holding the west bank, it is in israel's overwhelming interest to test, test and test again, okay? because that would be a huge strategic threat to israel if it has no choice but to absorb the west bank. >> but you travel there a lot. and you know the american jewish community here, both those crucial constituencies, it's always struck me that to get peace, you're going to have to convince a majority of israelis because they have the land. they have the land and the guns, in a sense.

they're the power on the ground. it's drifting to the right. they are less interested in the kind of deal you're describing. >> well, you have a more conservative on this issue right wing, whatever you want, nationalist population in israel now between the growing orthodox population and the russian jews. there's no question about that. you know, as far as american jews, you know, to me, the question, fareed, is yes, bibi netanyahu, because of political reasons and campaign donations and apac's influence, can get standing ovations in the u.s. congress anytime they want, seven days a week, 24/7. how many standing ovations do you think he could get at the student government at the university of missouri? at stanford? at harvard? at the university of virginia? at the university of texas? if you went to those student governments, they're the future. they're the future of voters. they're the future of people who will maintain the strategic relationship with israel. and there i can tell you, as anyone who goes to college

campuses knows, that people don't get israel, what israel is doing right now. some are alienated. some more -- and this is the bigger part, more -- i don't know. it's messy. i don't want to get involved in this at all. you know, that's where -- don't worry about me. i grew up, you know, identifying with israel very strongly, believing in a two-state solution, that the right of the jewish people to a state in the middle east next to a palestinian state. you're not going to lose me, you know. but what i don't see is people like me, jews or non-jews, being emotionally involved in this issue, growing up and caring about it. so that's the long term. that's israel's strategic strength. again, fareed, i understand, this is complicated. palestinians have missed a million opportunities including with the last israeli government. and there's a really legitimate question to ask, can they get their act together? forget for a hard-line deal, for the deal that president clinton

put out, that olmert, the previous minister, but i don't know. i just know one thing, you've got to test, test and test again because the implications of not are strategically enormously dangerous. >> when you look at israel today, what i'm struck by is that some level it's so secure. there's booming economy. its powerful military. it's gotten more powerful every year. nuclear arsenals some of which are on submarines. >> they behave like a disarmed costa rica. and this is not a disarmed costa rica. this is a powerful country with a powerful society, a powerful economy. but, again, i understand nine miles wide at its narrowest. i wouldn't ask israel to take any risks that seem unreasonable. but, boy, if they could strike a deal now with the palestinians, when you do have actually a decent palestinian authority, that has actually built a security force, that the israeli army will tell you has been effective. you know, this is what i've been saying from the beginning of the arab revolt, fareed, which is when is the time to make big decisions in life?

it's when you have all the leverage on your side. you see farther. you think more clearly. what did hosni mubarak do? he had 30 years of leverage vis-a-vis the egyptian people to democratize his people. he department do it. he didn't use it. then in one week he tried to do what he should have over 30 years. he failed. completely. people didn't believe a word he said. you don't want netanyahu to be the hosni mubarak of the peace process where they look back, we had all this time, decent palestinian authority to test -- i'm not saying cut a deal -- i don't know whether there's a deal -- but to really test whether they can deliver and do what we can to embolden and encourage and empower them. and we didn't use it. we sat back and said, look, i got a good poll from my week in washington. well, la-di-da. we threw you a fish. what is that good for, you know? ultimately, you want to anchor this in a really secure relationship. you don't want to be the hosni mubarak of the peace process where people say what did you do when you had all that leverage? you cited a poll?

when we come back, we'll talk to tom about what's going on in egypt, lebanon and syria. he's back from the region in a moment. what's this option? that's new.

personal pricing now on brakes. tell us what you want to pay. we do our best to make that work. deal!

my money. my choice. my meineke. we are back with "new york times'" tom friedman, who is back from the middle east. you were in egypt. you were in lebanon. let's first talk about syria because it's the place that everyone's trying to figure out. and none of us can get into syria, but lebanon is the closest you can get. what's your sense? >> a couple things strike you when you're in beirut. the first thing is how incredibly brave the syrian people who have been resisting their authoritarian government have been. you know, when egyptians gathered in tahrir square, one thing they knew for sure. after the initial effort by government thugs to put them down, when the army stepped in, they knew they were safe. they knew they could go down to the square. and they gathered there by the tens and hundreds and thousands and even over a million. syrians, when they walk out the door to protest, they know

they're dealing with a government and regime that will gun them down, and has killed somewhere between 900 and 1,000 already, wounded we don't know how many and jailed. stadiums being used and big facilities to hold all these people. and yet they still come out. and that's -- that is quite remarkable, and it shows you, again, this level of incredible not only the tyranny of these regimes but this deep desire for dignity, justice and freedom, which just transcends everything and spreads across that region. and so that's what's most impressive. now, syria, of course, this is complicated. it's the keystone of really the whole area. you change egypt, you have a big impact in the middle east, but mostly you change egypt, you change libya, you change libya. you change bahrain. egypt implodes. libya implodes. bahrain implodes. syria explodes. because if the government came down, it's not like egypt.

egypt, you had the regime and the army, a totally separate institution. syria, they are basically one and the same. so if syrian regime goes down, the whole state collapses. the syrian state collapses, that affects power relationships in lebanon, with hezbollah, syria's main client. it affects turkey, which has -- syria has a big kurdish population, a big alloway population, as does turkey. there are huge issues there about order. it affects iraq and the stability of the iraqi/syrian border. it affects israel, iran, jordan. so basically the whole middle east would potentially change. >> egypt, we did the show from egypt last week, and i was struck by how unfinished that revolution seems. i mean, we've stopped paying attention, but you go there, and it's still very much an ongoing question about what's going to happen. >> we're in a critical moment, fareed. and it's one that has to be dealt with not by speech and not by writing a check but with really active, smart and subtle

diplomacy. what is this moment? the egyptian army, which is the authority now, mubarak having been ousted, has basically set a pathway forward of how egypt progresses from tahrir square. first we have parliamentary elections. then the parliament will write a new constitution or sign people to do it. and then we'll have presidential elections. sounds good on paper. here's one problem. the only people organized now for the parliamentary election, which has been set for september, are the muslim brotherhood because they've had a party living underground. basically i went to their headquarters. they inaugurated last week. beautiful building. they're happy to give you a tour. they're all ready to go. but the whole strength of the tahrir movement was that it never had a leader. it was broad based. deliberately they did so there was no within to arrest. you had to arrest all the egyptian people. wonderful for a revolution. not good for running an election. that's where we really need to weigh in. leading egyptian figures, you interviewed mohamed elbaradei,

amir moussa have come out to generals to postpone the elections so everybody has a chance to get organized. i think quietly, subtly, we need to let the generals know that that is where we are going to be. i have a motto about the middle east, when it comes to elections. the arab world has had so few fair and free elections is that when they have one, everybody wants to vote. not just the people in that country. you can bet people in saudi arabia will want to vote with their donations and qatar and uae. a lot of those will go to the muslim brotherhood. all i say is we need to vote, too. >> there is a powerful role for the united states. this is one of those crises we were talking about earlier which was unexpected. but this is going to be a very important defining moment for obama's foreign policy. >> yeah. you know, i've had a chance to cover many secretaries of state. and every one of them has a moment, you know, which in baker, it was the fall of the berlin war, with colin powell, the fall of the iraq war, kosovo, warren krisz fer, bosnia. you never see it coming when you go into office. they never saw it coming.

but ultimately they are defined by how well they manage it. as much as control they have over it. i think that would be true for secretary clinton. i think this whole arab spring not only her but for president obama as well, how they manage it is going to be very central to how they're perceived in foreign policy. and i don't want to hold the bar up too high. as i said earlier, events on the ground or in the cockpit, but we need to understand that with a little voice here and a little voice there, like maybe you guys should delay this election three months until the progressives and all the parties get organized can be hugely decisive because this bus, fareed, is not going to come around again. you're not going to get another egyptian election. oh, you missed this bus. this is really important. >> tom friedman, a pleasure, as always. >> thank you. >> and we will be back. ♪

it's true. you never forget your first subaru. years ago, my mother taught me. and over the years, i've taught my family. we've created so much here together. so when my doctor said that over those years

my high cholesterol was contributing to plaque buildup in my arteries, i listened. and that's why i'm fighting my cholesterol with crestor. [ male announcer ] when diet and exercise alone aren't enough, adding crestor does more than lower bad cholesterol and raise the good. crestor is also proven to slow plaque buildup in arteries. crestor is not right for everyone -- like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant, or may become pregnant. simple blood tests will check for liver problems. tell your doctor about other medicines you are taking or if you have muscle pain or weakness. that could be a sign of serious side effects. ask your doctor about plaque build up. and if crestor is right for you. [ woman ] i love what we've created here together. [ male announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astra-zeneca may be able to help.

time now for "what in the world" segment. what caught my eye this week was a classic flip-flop. no, newt gingrich hasn't changed his mind about the ryan plan once more. once upon a time, as recently as a year ago, there was a country desperate to have membership in an organization formed by its neighbors. the country's president said that his country needed to be included without delay. today, one year later, the tune is very different. a top official from that country saying this week there's no reason to join. can you guess the country and the group? it is poland and the euro zone. it seems that warsaw no longer wants to exchange for euros. there's surely no greater sign of the euro's plummeting reputation.

just a few years ago countries like britain and denmark that had chosen to keep their own currency rather than adopting the new euro were seen as old fashioned, parochial, reactionary, and out of sync with the new world. that was then. but over the past year or two, britain's position has begun to look pretty sensible. the euro has obvious benefits. no more worrying about dozens of currencies going up and down. but given how it was set up, it also has many flaws. let's take a look at them through the prism of one country, greece, the poster child of the euro's problems. when it first joined the euro zone, it rode a wave of excellent economic growth, about 4% a year for eight years. that's more than germany, more than the u.s. finally, greece had a solid currency and was able to borrow lots of money at low interest rates. but that was the problem. it wasn't really greece's currency. the european central bank in frankfurt was setting rates. tiny greece wasn't even a factor. so athens borrowed and spent

like crazy, creating a little welfare state paradise of its own. but when trouble hit, that same single currency proved to be a straitjacket. growth has collapsed. greece's debt is about 150% of gdp, and it cannot devalue its currency to make its goods cheap and attractive on world markets. it's stuck with the euro. and rich european countries, chiefly germany, resent having to bail greece out because they can't force it to change its spendthrift ways. the fancy economic way of saying this is that the euro zone has unified monetary policy one currency but still has diverse fiscal policies. so what to do? two options are being debated. and those two options highlight europe's opposing forces. first, the eu leadership's plan, stay the course. more austerity for greece. more budget cutting. and, of course, more loans to tide it over. ignore the fact that greece can actually never repay them. the second option, some top

german officials say they don't want to keep bailing out their poorer cousins. so instead, extend greece's repayment deadlines, a debt restructuring. but the european central bank calls that a horror scenario with the possibility of bank defaults and a vicious domino effect throughout europe. and that is the real worry. this isn't really about greece. it has a $350 billion economy about the same size as michigan's. it's 1% of the euro zone. but if greece defaults, it would be the first rich country in six decades to do so. and it could lead investors to free the other fringe euro zone economies -- portugal, ireland, even spain and perhaps even italy -- and that would be really problematic. so the reality is that germany and to a lesser extent france and the netherlands will end up spending more and more money bailing out their less prudent neighbors. countries like poland that once clamored for euro membership will keep their distance.

and the brits will say, i told you so. in fact, they already are. here's what prime minister david cameron told me earlier this year. >> i think we were right not to join. and while i'm prime minister, we will not join. >> looks like those words in davos resonated far beyond the confines of the euro zone. and we'll be right back. >> we want the price to be between 70 and 80. not only to help the west but to help ourselves.

the arab spring has been a fascinating story but one with relatively small, immediate impact on the world economy or on your life in america. but that could change if things were to shake up in saudi arabia. instability in saudi arabia would mean that oil prices would not just rise but could double. so that's the country we need to look at as closely as we can. we do so now through the eyes of perhaps the most famous saudi arabian in the world. our guest is one of the most successful investors on the planet, the 26th richest man in

the world according to "forbes." he is the biggest foreign investor in the united states, and he is also a prince, a grandson of the founding king of saudi arabia. he is prince al waleed. al waleed straddles the worlds of america and saudi arabia, two worlds that need each other but barely seem to understand each other. so we are going to try to bridge that gap. prince al waleed, welcome. >> it's a pleasure to be with you my friend, fareed. >> let's start with the question everybody has on their mind. you are a prince of saudi arabia. how stable is saudi arabia? you see this sea of revolution taking place across the middle east. and it seems the one country that has not been particularly affected is saudi arabia. >> yeah. thanks god, saudi arabia is in a very unique situation. the relationship between the king and his people is very close. people love the king a lot. that's one reason, obviously, for not having any civil

disturbances over there. plus the saudi arabia situation, although economically, we are not in a-1 shape for sure. we have issues in our country, but for sure the situation is not dire and deep and bad. so all these reasons will help in explaining to you that why saudi arabia's situation is stable and thanks god, you know, the latest call to demonstrate failed completely in saudi arabia. >> but tell me a little bit about the tensions in the country, because clearly the king and the royal family is worried. when these revolutions began in the middle east, the saudi government effectively wrote a check for $40 billion. $40 billion is a lot of money, even for saudi arabia. so there are concerns that people feel a lack of openness, a lack of freedom, a lack of progress. do you think that this current system can provide that, or does there need to be significant progress in the next year or two?

>> a somewhere fay -- very famous man established singapore. singapore is a country with democracy in the far east. he was having lunch with him one time and asked him what kind of democracy do you have? he said we have our own democracy. it's not u.s.-type democracy. what he meant by that, we have a system whereby by participation of the people has to be implemented. and i believe that saudi arabia will have to enact some new laws whereby participation of the people has to do one for another. >> what about the relationship of the saudi royal family to the religious establishment? ever since the taking of the grand mosque in mecca, the saudi royal family seemed to get into a deal where they ceded very important parts of the kingdom, education, religious affairs to fairly radical wahabi people. because they felt this would ensure there was no challenge to the monarchy. my sense is over the last five,

seven years there has been a turn where it was recognized that this was not such a good idea. what can you tell us about that? >> clearly, the last seven, eight years, saudi arabia began changing and forming. clearly and unfortunately, there are some saudis who are extreme, but they shout and scream very loudly. and the west thinks, oops, these are representatives of the religious community and mainstream saudi arabia, which is not the case. they have rightly said that the last five, six, seven years, the king has been trying to neutralize them and get them off the system so they don't get saudi arabia off track. >> is it succeeding? are these forces declining? >> it's succeeding but slowly. you and i would like this to be expedited. i think now, the king, some of these people are being sidestepped. for example, saudi arabia has never had a university where women and men could be together. some were against that.

slowly by slowly it's happening. >> there are lots of people who when they think of saudi arabia, they think of the support for very extreme islamic preachers, islamic centers, islamic movements and terrorists. and there's a lot of documentation that says that money did come from saudi arabia. not always the saudi government. in fact, very often not the saudi government but saudi individuals. while i was in cairo and the people in egypt said that their most extreme religious people are all funded from saudi arabia. when will this stop? >> you know, this problem is there, was there, actually. but, you know, the saudi arabian government's official position is really not to do that. not to support those people at all. we encourage the fact that there are some saudis who are supporting some of those groups that want to be terrorists. when they were supported, the assumption was that these were not terrorists. they were only islamic jihadists or advancing the cause of islam.

clearly when this turned out to be not the case, saudi arabia enforced strong conditions. >> yet when i go to iraq during the war and you tried to figure out who was funding the most extreme sunni militants, al qaeda-affiliated organizations, what we would hear is that the money was coming in from saudi arabia. >> i think this is a bit old news in history. i can assure you, fareed, right now, the situation has changed a lot. we were the victim of many terrorist acts. my own center, my kingdom center, which is the highest priced tower in saudi arabia, was vacated twice because of terrorist attacks, terrorist threats. remember last november when saudi arabia gave a tip to the u.s. government whereby two planes were saved from being bombed by these two bombs that were supposed to explode in midair. so rest assured saudi arabia is better today than it was five or years ago. >> given your financial prowess,

i have to ask you questions about oil, because saudi arabia, of course, is the central banker of oil. explain to me why the price of oil is now averaging over $100 a barrel for the year. you don't have a substantial increase in demand right now. if you look at china, india, the united states, europe, growth is actually not as strong as it could have been everywhere. you don't have a particular disruption of supply. there was a little bit because of libya, but they're very tiny. the saudis increased supply, but then they cut back when nobody wanted to buy this extra supply. if you don't have increased demand, you don't have reduced supply, why did it go up? >> first, you're too smart. no doubt the price was hovering around $85. it jumped to $100 after what happened in libya and bahrain. clearly, there is still some fear factor and also speculation factor.

bahrain is now stable but still they're not 100% sure what's going to happen. you hear once in a while iran coming and jumping and antagonizing and intimidating the region. >> but if fundamentals are in one place and speculation takes the price higher, ultimately the speculation will fail, right? the price -- >> it should. >> so do you think prices will come down? >> the stiff position of saudi arabia, we want the price to be between $70 and $80. not only to help the west but to help ourselves. we don't want the west to go find alternatives. the higher the price oil goes, the more incentive you have to go and find alternatives. to have the price for around $70, $80 which is a price good for consumers and for producers. >> so let's talk a little bit about the economy, the global economy. you're one of the most successful investors in the world. would you continue -- you're still investing in america? >> oh, for sure continue. clearly the united states has stable system, has due process, has stability.

you know exactly where you're heading. inevitab inevitably, in third-world countries, you have more risks. the united states is down for sure, not out. >> let me ask you, this new process of electing a new king of saudi arabia, is it conceivable that they will -- their new council will look around and say, well, the most qualified man in saudi arabia is clearly prince al waleed? >> in saudi arabia, there are 34 people exactly, that once the succession comes, they will meet and they will elect a king. i will always serve my country in any capacity, but i'm very happy with what i'm doing right now. >> if by some chance you were to become the king of saudi arabia, i will insist that you come and do an interview. in that case, we will go to riyadh to see you. >> i will come to you anyway, my friend, fareed. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. we will be right back. >> my sense is we erred. we kept interest rates too low. lots of advice...

and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information. everyone works as a team. and i only need to talk to one person about her care. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

i'm fredricka whitfield in the cnn world headquarters in

atlanta. president barack obama has just arrived in joplin, missouri, getting ready to see for himself the devastation from the nation's single deadliest tornado. the president joins the governor at a memorial service in about an hour from now, and cnn will be carrying that live for you. 146 people are now dead in joplin. search crews are still trying to find 44 other people still missing. the city will observe a moment of silence at 5:41 central time. that's the exact moment the ef-5 tornado struck one week ago. the defense department contractor lockheed martin says hackers did not get any sensitive information. lockheed martin is one of several military contractors whose security network was attacked by hackers just last week. the company's security team detected the attack and took countermeasures. and thousands of people are

taking part in the annual memorial day rolling thunder motorcycle ride in washington, d.c. bikers rode from the pentagon to the national mall to draw attention to u.s. troops missing or held as prisoners of war. an afternoon rally will feature several speakers, including defense secretary robert gates. join me for more news at the top of the hour. witnessed snowfall on the first day of spring. ♪ but the most beautiful thing i've ever seen was the image on a screen that helped our doctor see my wife's cancer was treatable. [ male announcer ] ge technologies help doctors detect cancer early so they can save more lives. bringing better health to more people. ♪

at liberty mutual, we know how much you count on your car and how much the people in your life count on you.

that's why we offer accident forgiveness, man: good job. where your price won't increase due to your first accident. we also offer a hassle-free lifetime repair guarantee, where the repairs made on your car are guaranteed for life or they're on us. these are just two of the valuable features you can expect from liberty mutual. plus, when you insure both your home and car with us, it could save you time and money. at liberty mutual, we help you move on with your life. so get the insurance responsible drivers like you deserve. looks really good. call us at... or visit your local liberty mutual office, where an agent can help you find the policy that's right for you. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? >> female announcer: where everything is included, sometimes the greatest luxury of all is doing nothing at all.

save up to 65%. call 1-800-sandals. federal reserve bank presidents who run the regional federal reserve banks and are crucial advisers to the chairman, ben bernanke, ten to be rather conservative economists and businessmen and the like. they are not known for their rebellious spirit, for their dissenting opinions, and for being outspoken in public. but thomas honig has a bit of all of the above and i think it would be very interesting to see what he has to say. he is the president of the federal reserve bank of kansas city, and he thinks the federal reserve is making all the wrong moves as it tries to guide america to recovery. welcome. >> thank you very much. delighted to be here. >> so the most important thing the federal reserve does is set interest rates. and by keeping interest rates very low ever since the

financial crisis, essentially at zero, it has allowed banks, corporations, but also individuals to borrow money cheaply. this has fueled this recovery such as it is. you're saying we need to stop that, we need to raise interest rates. there are a lot of people who look at you and think, this is crazy, this is the weakest economy since the great depression. the recovery is the weakest since the second world war, and in this context, to raise interest rates would put the brakes on the recovery such as it is. >> first of all, i think it's important to remember that the policy that was implemented today was the policy that was implemented during the crisis itself. we are well into our second year of recovery and we have to think forward from here.

that is what is the federal interest rates for future years. we're seeing not so much just inflation, but in terms of imbalances in the economy. and i'm not advocating for tight monetary policy, but i think we have to get off of zero if we want to avoid repeating some of the mistakes in the past with a very easy credit environment. >> sit fair to say if you look at the charts from the 1980s onward, what has happened is we've achieved a lot of our growth not by dealing with some of these structural issues but by encouraging americans to spend more money, to take out more credit card debt, to take out more housing debt and consumption went from 62%, 63%, up to 70%. so we've had a generation of a kind of expansion of credit that was unsustainable because it was not coming as a consequence of

people's innicomes or wages. >> our savings rate, which was running at 8% for years and years, between 8 and 10rks fell 2% or less, and if you look at countries, those who state rate. they have a reasonable savings rate, not necessarily high but reasonable savings rate, 8% to 10%, they don't consume everything they save for the future. and their governments don't carry debt. so we have to -- we have to step up to that. if we want to be great nation, we have to address our fiscal challenges. at zero interest rate, i'm afraid encourages consumption. why would you hold on and save your money when you get .02% in

the bank? that's why i say i'm not for high interest rates but i am for rebalancing over time so you do reward thrift. i think it's extremely important we do that. >> in terms of what you said, the one strong criticism that you made is the conditions that allowed all this to happen. the low interest rate conditions that happened in 2003, 2004 that allowed a lot of this to happen. sit fair to say history will look on alan greenspan very differently and more critically given the effect, the consequences of his decision, particularly after the bursting of the tech bubble to keep interest rates very low. >> i think that -- i was on the open market, so that's something we all have to thing our way through. the real history on that will be

years in the judgment, if you will, in terms of all the circumstances. >> but what's your sense? >> my sense is we erred. we kept interest rates too low. 1%. it's not they want to point blame to myself or anyone else but i do have to say this is what happened, what were the consequences, and what have we learned from it. it is, frankly, one of the reasons that i'm more, if you will, cautious in the sense of saying you need to not tighten -- not have a tight monetary policy but begin to let the markets know that we aren't going to assure them of everything. >> thomas hoenig. [ male announcer ] your hard work has paid off.

and you want to pass along as much as possible to future generations. at northern trust, we know what works and what doesn't. as one of the nation's largest wealth managers, we can help you manage the complexities of transferring wealth. seeking to minimize taxes while helping maximize what's passed along. because you just never know how big those future generations might be. ♪ expertise matters. find it at northern trust.

our question this week from the gps challenge is what unusual british food is on its way to being banned in denmark? is it "a," jellied eels, those are pretty self-zplan skplan torrey, "b," chip butty sandwiches, "c," marmite, a by-product of beer spread on bread or "d," black pudding,

made with blood. stay tuned. we'll have ten more questions. while you're there, make sure you check out our website. you'll find smart interviews and some takes from some of our favorite experts and find all of our gps shows. if you missed one, you can click and read. this week's book of the week is excellent. it's by david ignatius. it's called "bloodmoney." it's about a super secret mission that's gone awry. it's about the spy system. you'll feel as if you're reading the front page of the newspaper, only much better written. it's a great way for summer reading. for the last look. how to make it rain. it's a question that'smemorial. native americans have their traditional rain dance. of course, some hinn