richard, so, with that, i'd like to thank all three of them. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> tonight on c-span2, award

winning investigative journalists discuss their craft, and the ground breaking ceremony for the edward kennedy institute, and former senate majority leader, bill frist portrait is revealed in the capitol. >> the george poke awards and the night before the annual awards ceremony in new york, some of the winners gather for a seminar. this year, four investigative journalists discuss lifting the vail of secret ri on sensitive subject. we'll also hear from ac thompson and a "washington post" reporter, dana priest. this is an hour and a half. >> i would like to introduce to you first and again to be

acknowledged sydney, our curator, and the current curator of the poke awards, john darnton. >> thank you very much, dr. steinberg. i'd like to welcome you all here to this event. as you know, the george poke seminar is a one time of year when we get to wrestle with some of the major issues about journalism and to discuss them with some of our winners. i would like to say first of all, i'd like to acknowledge the center for communication which is the cosponsor of this event, and it's exec -- its executive director katharine williams. our theme this year is penetrating the vail of secrecy. we are troubles coming up with the right metaphor, but i think you understand the right idea, how reporters go about pursuing their subjects, how they use their considerable array of tools and skills to get

information that's hard to get. in short, how they penetrate that wall of secrecy that surrounds so many of our institutions today both public and private. i think one could say that in this day, there are more and more authoritarian regimes, governments, corporations, and other entities like the military that are keeping more and more things secret, and, yet, crying out and publicizing those secrets are more important than ever before for people in democracies and dictatorships. from water gate to wikileaks, that tug of war, that battle between secrecy and revolution, it takes different forms and different shapes at different times, but essentially, it remains the same. tonight, we're fortunate in we

have a really star-studded panel here. the reporters that you see on this stage have all done major investigative work. they have covered and written about the military, intelligence agencies, the police, and the prison system. obviously, all four of those institutions have put a premium on guarding their secrets. let me introduce them. to my immediate left is michael hastings. his article in the july issue of "rolling stone" was probably almost as explosive a one of the countries foremost invest good investigative reporters working for four years on the "washington post" on beats including the pentagon, national security, and intelligence. she's covered the invasion of panama and wars in iraq, kosovo and afghanistan and traveled widely with army special forces in asia, africa, and south

america. she's won numerous awards, so many if i were to list them, we'd be here half the night just listening to them, so i'll just say they include two very special ones, two george polks and two pulitzers, one for revealing the existence of black site prisons, the cia interrogation centers overseas, and a more recent one for disclosing the horrendous conditions at walter reed army medical center p. she is the author of a much acclaimed book, a plies diser finalist -- pulitzer finalist in keeping peace with america's military. further down the line is ac tompson. he came to journalism through a side door.

in the san fransisco bay area, he was a self-proclaimed rocking the couch circuit. [laughter] he was an editor then with specific news service who happens not incidentally to be this year's winner of the george polk lifetime achievement award. he began freelancing and writing for the "san fransisco bay guardian" specializing in abuse in authority and corruption. he now works for propublic cay and port of a book called torture taxi and won a george polk for local reporting in 2005. the front line documentary that won him this year's george polk award discloses killings of civilians by police in the

aftermath of katrina in new orleans. i think we have a snipit from the introduction which we can play now. ♪ >> tonight on front line, an exclusive investigation in the chaotic days after hurricane katrina -- >> people were killed by the new orleans police department. >> 11 civilians shot by new orleans police officers. >> this will not be tolerated. >> as rumors circulated about marshal law. >> i heard rumors that was in place and there was rumors, no, it was not. >> i never heard mar shall law. >> they could suspend their own

rules. >> do they expect us to go through streets shooting looeders? >> an order was given police officers authorization to shoot looters. >> they revert back to what it's always been. >> that's the guy? tonight, the story of one of those killings. >> what happened here wound upsetting this chain of events that turned the new orleans police department upside dop. >> questions about a coverup. >> the way it was destroyed told a story. a homicide. >> ac thompson and frontline investigate law and disorder in new orleans. [applause] >> finally, wilbur.

he's a last minute addition, and if anybody knows about secrecy behind walls, it is he. if mr. tompson came in through a side door, he came in through the back door. he was interested in journalism after serving a lifetime sentence known as an goal ego la and send there at the age of 19 after killing a bank teller during the bundled robbery. in 1976, he became editor of the prison newspaper, the angleite using it to shine a light on conditions and practices that were shocking and rarely talked about. a film he directed, "behind bars" won an academy award

nomination. "life" magazine or "time" called it the most reabill at a timed prisoner in america, and yet, for years, he could not get out. finally in january, 2005 after a jury clintoned him on a lesser charge, he was released on time served. he's the author of a book, "in the place of" which i have to recommend to you. i'm halfway through it. it's an absolute page turner, and he won a george polk award in 1979, but could not obviously pick it up, so he is here and will be at our luncheon tomorrowment i think we have footage of him in an angola. >> as we take an extraordinary look inside angola, louisiana's

maximum security prison. he's spent 33 years on the inside. no one knows prison life better than wilburrideau. he was sent here for stabbing a 47-year-old woman to death. he was 19 years old. >> all the psychological and social crachs that prop you up and enable the average person to walk a line and go about their lives, all that is removed. i mean, you have absolutely nothing. you got to build an existence in a vacuum. >> he did just that teaching himself to write. he became the editor of the prison magazine. he won national awards in journalism for his stories about the violence, depravity and dangers that are part of life in prison. so a few months ago, we asked

him to take us into this world he knows so well. this is pictures of prison life from the inside out, images no one on the outside could possibly get. [applause] >> we'll have a discussion running perhaps 45 minutes or closer to an hour. i want to leave time for questions from the audience. when you do have questions, and please make sure they are comments, not speeches, approach -- we have a microphone at the bottom of each aisle. you'll need to actually speak into the microphone to be recorded. i'd like to start with you dana. your series, top secret america, an absolutely chilling description of a kind of national security concerns in bureaucracy run amuckment i

amuck. i think you said after 9/11 there's something like 1200 government organizations and 1931 private companies working on counterterrorism of related things. you and the cowriter took two years on this material. how did you get the idea for it and go about assembling all that information? >> well, briefly, i'd covered intelligence and the military after 9/11, and when we got done trying to figure out what happened on 9/11, who al-qaeda was, we decided to say what's the government doing? what is the government doing to try to fight this war that was now called the global war on terrorism? unlike the military which is a relatively open organization compared to the intelligence

world, we counted find out -- couldn't find out because it was al classified, ology of it was -- all of it was classified. that was the secrecy world we were up against, but managed to write about the cia for many years and other parts of it. there's a certain point, ben and i, who have been colleagues for a long time, talking a lot on the phone about what we see and what do you think it is and things like that, you know, there's something going on here that's very big, and it's structural, it's probably permanent. you know, i can feel it wherever i go, the number of organizations, the number of the prorifflation -- proriff ration of code names, the units, so why don't we figure out how to map it and how to describe this huge thing which was big because the

military's large and there's 18 intelligence agencies within the state government, and so we took a long time figuring out how would we do that? we decided based on in part in the experience i had doing black fights knowing that even the cia, you can put a coverup over things that you try to keep secret, but everything lives somewhere. you know, it doesn't live in the clouds. it leavings here on the earth -- lives here on the earth. we said, well, what if we then did sort of a mapping of our own of what we came to call an alternative geography of the united states, sort of mapping the dna of the secret world, and we started at the secret level looking for units and organizations and companies that did work through the government at the secret levels, classification, and we found so many that we said we're never going to get through this, let's go to the top-secret level which

is much more difficult because that actually is a huge leap. >> how do you get the names of the companies and organizations? >> well, it was then -- i'll tell you one fun story about that. i mean, some of them were a process of just taking the organizations we knew. bill is a self-described obsessive person and routinely looks at the government in places people don't normally look at. if there was an anomaly, he would spot it. for years, you know, he'd go through and try to find these things. one example. he had a name of an organization that he was convinced was a secret organization, and so i got the address, and i went to crystal city where it was located, and we knew the street and the name and the floor it was located on because he had

records of wiring contracts that would wire cables from one office to another, and so he knew there was a triangle of wires between this organization, a very secret organization in the pentagon, and another building by the same organization in another place in crystal city, so we went looking for it. we knew what floor it was on, and went to the lobby, and we were looking for the 15th floor, and the lobby had an electronic one, you scrolled everything in the building, and it stopped on the 14th floor. i'm thinking, we need the 15th floor. [laughter] i went up and got into the elevator and saw there was a 16th floor button, so i pushed it, and i went up, and, you know, ready for who knows what, but found a janitor instead.

[laughter] went around the corner, and there's the sign and the camera that looked at you and the warning signs to go away and all of that. i did the same thing to another building also in this triangle, and, again, the marquee outside, this was an air force building, had a lot of the names to different air force organizationings, but nowhere was the defense policy analysis office. again, it didn't exist, and so clearly we learned if i went back to the crystal city place that i had gone through many times reporting about the military, i now started looking at marquees, and there's big giant buildings like 15 storiesal and had -- stories tall and had nothing on the marquee other than joe's pizza place that was downstairs. [laughter] he was doing his thing on deep web searches which is something

everybody should learn how to do better, and with contracts, paperwork, with a lot of interviews that i did with people i'd either known for a long time in the intelligence world, and you have to accumulate sources over a long period of time who pointed in other directions who came up with over two years time, a map that actually pin points where it all is, and then we tried to figure out what all these things did, not in any real gran nuclear level, but what do they work on generally, and then you'll see on our website which is washingtonpost.com/topsecret amr washingtonpost.com/topsecretamer ica, you can play around with the data base that shows you where how many things work on x, y, and z, and you'll see one of the big patterns we found was redundancy and the thing had not just grown. in fact, it doubled in size in most places prior to 9/11 and that the money was flowing so

quickly that no one really paid much attention to where it was going. if you had an idea, you could get it funded, and therefore what developed is a huge redundancy in almost any place you can imagine. >> yeah. >> that's one of the -- >> in fact, we may have a chart or two that ran with this story. if we could throw that up. i think they are kind of amazing. it shows -- there you are. [laughter] look at that. goldberg -- while i describe this as chilling, there's so many agencies and redundancy and everything that no one can possibly get a handle on it. it's like drying from a fire hose instead of a glass of water. >> general clapper, he actually said, the biggest person who

knows it all is god. ->> it certainly wasn't created by god though. did you at any point in time when you had to verify the information, i know you interviewed defense secretary gates, did any of them say please don't publish this or parts of it, and did you hold anything back? >> you know, i mean, you have to -- national security reporting, your balancing is things that really need to be kept secret because lives are at stake, an operation that clearly crosses the line and is at stake and others are described on a cay-by-case basis, and it's hard to imagine unless you're getting into that realm. in all cases where i have something obviously secret and the government feels they make it secret, they classify it for a legitimate reason, that,

again, that's what they are doing. they are trying to work to do it for legitimate reasons because it damages national security are what the rules are, and then i'll always tell them what it is that we have, and so that they can make an argument that if you publish this, whatever argument they want to make, and in this case, they did make an argument that many member of details that we have would be damaging, and for us -- and actually they said don't publish this. we're going to publish it, can you be more helpful and explain what your concerns are. we didn't get very far. >> did you hold stuff out? >> we did, but we did that because when we internally discussed what it would be, we had some people who are in -- who have been in the intelligence that are no longer

there and also really value what the post does, to talk through the various aspects and could we be setting people up for damaging, you know, results, but we didn't want to do that, and what we always have to do is we walked as far up to the line of giving readers information that has details to make the story authentic because if you notice, there's not very many people quoted in it, we walk up to the line without hopefully crossing it and not damaging any national security things, but also not gray -- gray tiewty putting stories in it. >> you're comfortable with it and feel nothing in your article really ended up being all that sensitive or at least -- >> well, i'm sure there was a big hoopla over it because for

one, it put all the names of the companies together, and the companies didn't like that even though this was based on unclassified information which another interesting dynamic that we can talk about with wikileaks is that the same kind of declassifying things, like ridiculous things in some cases, there's an enormous amount of queries on the there on the web and elsewhere that can lead you along the trail we took so the government has no idea what is out there to be had. >> yeah, they don't even know. adam, in your documentary, you con accept traited on the 31 -- concentrated on the 31-year-old man hen ri, and why did you choose him to tell the larger story? >> he was a 31-year-old man father of four shortly after

hurricane katrina, and we understand he was going to get goods taken from a dimestore. there were pots and pans and candles and stuff, and he was shot by a police officer near that dimestore. he sought help. his brother and a good samaritan and other person rushed him for help, and one thing that didn't go into the documentary that's worth saying now is this was on the west bank of the mississippi after hurricane katrina. it didn't flood there, but there was no power or water and the conditions were really rough. it was within new orleans proper, and the closest hospital was across the per rich line in the next one over, and there was a barricade there and they couldn't get through because the law enforcement was set up there, so this was a group of foir black men in a car, one of had just been shot, and the driver said we have four black men in the car, we're not going

to get through into the largely white neighboring parrish, and we're going to the closest place to get help, and that's to this police encampment up the street at a school. they didn't realize he was shot by a police officer, and so they sped him to this swat team outpost that took over the elementary school and showed up there that, hey, these guys know cpr, rush him to the hospital, treat him here, they probably have medical supplies, they'll help him. they didn't. what they did is they physically attacked the abled bodied men, three abled bodied men and left henry to bleed to death in the back of the car, and then the officers took henry's body and the car that the good samaritan had been driving, drove it over to another police station, parked it on the banks of the

mississippi river, set it on fire, left it there and pretended he was a piece of garbage and was not a human and didn't matter, and they covered it up for three years until i started poking into it, and yeah. >> when you poked into it you were clearly running a risk. i noticed you even interviewed the deputy police commissioner. they must have known what you were looking into. did you have any kind of frightening moments, encounter hostility? did you get -- how did you get people to open up including his brother who i think was one of three, wasn't if? >> yeah, you know, there's two important things here, and one is first like the bigger challenge rather than the awesome action movie stuff like getting threatened by cops and stuff -- [laughter] honestly it was bureaucratic. the secret eat here and weapon

here was our attorney. every single piece of documentation that we wanted to get, we had to threaten to sue to get, so the attorney who worked with me on the tv and on the stories, the print stories, she was the one who did a lot of the hard work. they didn't want to give up anything from the coroner's office. we had to sue them to get the autopsy report. >> tell them what you were told when you went to the coroner's office. >> i called the corns' office because i wanted to see the autopsy of people who died after hurricane katrina. i said, you know, would you like me to make a formal public record's request? i know this is a public document under louisiana law, and the staffer said, well, you can do that, but we don't follow the law anyway. [laughter] so we prevailed, but that's how everything was with the police records, the coroner reports, with everything.

i met with a source who said i don't want anyone to know why meeting with you because the police will if they find out they will end up doing something like planning a 3 pounds of cocaine in my car and i thought this person is crazy and watched

too much training day. then after restricted interviewing a lot of cops who had actually done that i should have been like i was pretty naive this is how it goes down in new orleans. >> did you write often about police and social injustice, housing projects? what andreu to this as a kind of specialty? is their something in your background? why did you dig deeply into this one particular area? >> it's really this and i've been thinking about it it was early on in my mentoring with the award winner that i'm interested in the stories of people from the ground up and people at the bottom and the story of people who aren't being taught to by the media. so that is the way that i

approached all these stories. so my point of entry for doing the investigation into what happened with henry was really threw his family. it wasn't for people with the top of the police department saying this horrible thing happened and no one is doing a thing. it was the people at the bottom but no one had talked to and if anyone had just gone and spent time with them and listen to them they would have seen the story and that is another secrecy that there are people there does not listened to. they don't get a chance to communicate their message and that is what i tried to do a lot. >> go to places others don't talk who usually can't talk to. >> exactly. >> speaking of starting at the top instead of the bottom, your piece on a general mcchrystal had a huge impact and i read somewhere and you were surprised by that. did you not know what you had when you printed it and if you

told newsweek i'm shocked by the response. >> one reason i'm shocked, i was shocked by the response and still am is i've been covering the war in afghanistan for five years and i don't mean that ironically it's just like there's this huge all dropping stuff that comes out about what's going on in iraq and afghanistan that leaves a dent in our public consciousness. so my thinking at the time is i knew it was material but my thinking was maybe they will talk about it on cable for a couple of hours and then i will go on my way and write about my time with the general. so it was quite surprised.

for years working for newsweek and finding a lot of reports and covering the war in iraq what i realized what had been often is the most interesting part i felt were being taken out of what was getting published and it wasn't in that it was the news was always there but it was the offhand comment what people say and how they act and what it was like to be there that i find really fascinating but they would never make it into -- [inaudible] >> they were not necessarily in the medium i was kind of writing for what i decided to leave "newsweek" one of the things i wanted to do is capture the details and one of the first stories i did with and gq where i went to the outpost on the border to afghanistan and

pakistan and talk about people who never ever listens to the private and the specialist he's not being listened to and all of a sudden here is this guy that comes up and says your job is just to listen to all the complaints that i have and on like my guinn buddies who heard them from today's st it's all new to you? and then put to the magazine? >> there's a lot of good mother to reporting coming out in iraq and afghanistan and of which the reporters talk directly. a person afghanistan but i did was wait on guard duty and listen and talk for hours no one

ever really hung out with these top-ranking guys instead of told it like it was with them so that is what much of the thinking. she even fire that that was president obama's decision and my thinking as well lighted the best i could do and -- >> how did you manage to achieve the kind of fly on the wall? how did you get access? the surprising things happen in the first 24, 48 hours that you met. how did you in a way get yourself into their confidence and did you have to establish any ground rules at all? >> i didn't have to establish any.

i wanted to do a profile of general mcchrystal and said he i would love to a profile of general mcchrystal. he said come to paris next week. i said okay. i shut it in paris and sort of said i'd love to a story with like you guys hanging out in paris in europe and the other part in kabul and a sort of followed them around with a tape recorder and notepad. a lot of this stuff ended up getting down that became controversial was set in the first 24 to 40 hours. so much so i already had my story but then the volcano wind up in icelandic and i kind of ended up getting stuck with them for longer which was advantageous in the end because i got to the extent of who they were. >> i read in preparation for this a couple of, you know, i would say four or five times,

and it's interesting apart from mcchrystal himself for not really but the three things he said, one about eikenberry, one about not wanting to receive e-mails from culbert -- holbrooke. >> i wouldn't say it was trashy naturally. the damaging quotes came from people close to him and under him. >> that's not true. if you read the story is vice president biden and -- in general the mcchrystal who started making fun of president biden and for the comments to

follow. so this idea that it was just the aide saying -- >> i said that it's interesting that a lot of the material seemed to have come from people under him. i don't think that makes it invalid. many of them were imported by name so you must have said, i will quote you on this. >> we had their names and my editors took them out for readability. there were occasions when they did say stuff was off the record and if i published that that would have been a real story. but i stuck to -- one of the sort of interesting aspects to the story coming and going back i have a book that is coming out about it and i was going back

and sort of listening to my first interview and with general mcchrystal is a really amazing moment on tape where the press say michael is going to be hanging out with us and for the next couple of days in paris and the general said that's great. and then the president said are there any questions we should ask the staff which to me is the sort of moment of establishing some kind of framework for what story they were expecting. >> i don't mean this to be a contentious question, but do you think -- obviously this has created some controversy among your colleagues. if you think that it's fair to hang out with someone over a long period of time or even a short period of time and kind of, you know, go drinking with them, listen to them -- >> i didn't drink with them.

[laughter] >> had you read rolling stone? >> to hang out with somebody and here they're kind of off-the-cuff comments. >> i'm going to contest everything you say. [laughter] >> jokes. and i'm not saying they are irrelevant. do you think it's fair -- into a kind of larger portrait. >> the key in this sense is they were not offhand comments directly at the idea of the civil military relation and the eisel military relation is the key component to the counterinsurgency in afghanistan. so when we have the top general of the war and the staff and the

general for the command when you have the top general of the war making comments that were derogatory about the civilian leadership whether they were justified or not to make those comments, that to me was clearly important to tell. >> can you tell us kind of quickly how journalism attracted you in angola and what did it for you? >> i discovered what was at that time the bloodiest prison in the united states and i saw things that were absolutely perfect. i'd never been in a war like this before. and i just couldn't believe

people knew what was going on. they couldn't know. the rest of society couldn't know because if they did i don't think that they could go for and you send people to prison yes not what's taking place in prison, and by then i decided i wanted to be a writer so i decided i would try telling what was going on, and i wrote newspapers and asked for a forum and the only that answered me that was in mississippi who said because that is what i said in prison, the jungle, and i started writing a weekly column and several years later a brand

new director of corruption came in and he had been leading me and he liked what he read and felt i wanted to tell the truth about what was going on, so he also felt that a big problem in prison and the misconception to keep about each other and they were so ready to believe the waste of each other is because the way they receive each other and he felt that the free press, you know, the press plays this out in the streets in the free world. it educates people on both sides, everybody. and he felt that you could transfer information was passed through the prism grapevine and

if you could transfer that over to the legitimate from, and that is the free press, then it would maybe it could change things. and he asked if i'd do it and i told him only and he surprised the hell out of me by saying okay. you have to understand, censorship has been a religion practiced universally in the america's prisons and this is the first time. that's the way that it happens. okay. and we should hands on that there was a condition. we were given the power to investigate anything the we could substantiate and published in the story just so long as it is true and if we didn't know the truth at least make an honest effort to find out what the truth is. and his thinking was the prison

was soporific what are you having it for? if the public knew the truth perhaps they would change things, and there was the whole gist of it. >> did you find that it how to bridge the gap between those who were being kept and those who were doing the keeping? >> it did. they got to understand each other because what we did is wrote about both sides. we covered it like a community and that's what we did and a very real publication even though we were self-taught journalists we didn't know what we were doing but we have an idea you read other publications and see what they do and what's try to do the same thing. that's the way we did it and we

thought we were doing pretty good. >> you had a number of major stories about the sex slaves, about the electric chair burning people. >> the electric chair, as we discovered there was some photographs and when i discovered about the photographs is they were in court and none of the other news media published it. the most effective way to do this is, you know, if you're going to do something you ought to be able to at least look at what you do. if you can't look at it the media shouldn't be doing it. so we published them. we got the pictures and published the pictures and -- >> what was the reaction among

the other inmates? the prisoners especially to the historians about sex. within the engage dennett or sexual violence that they didn't they didn't like the story because the friends and relatives in the outside world felt they had anything to do with this kind of stuff that was going on because understand what we did at that time the prison authorities nationwide used to portray sexual violence as isolated incidents, and they were done by the inmates come and the reality was heterosexuals were doing this. and the gay inmates quite often weren't victims and it was done with the approval of the administration although they would say we've got nothing to do with it.

we can't control this. they were doing it. and it divided the inmates as long as you've got one segment of the inmate population controlling the other and slaves who it makes the prison easier to run, and we were able to get because of this directive who offered everybody to answer questions whenever we ask about their jobs they have to tell the truth [inaudible] >> did you have to run the story by anyone, by the warden before printing it? >> we had to get -- we had to run it through peggy gershwin, she was our supervisor of the time and assistant to the ward and the board and didn't have time to do with that. and all -- in fact, she went back to school and took six

months i think studied journalism to see what it's about because she knew what the director wanted. they wanted a very real publication just like "the new york times" and wall street post and many others and took pride in that. the thing is we were able in the violence that we were able to get officials from the jordan, chief of security, everybody to admit what they were doing. they admitted against the to have these accommodations and security forces to this and that time the administration admitted that happened and in fact they reported that the next american correctional convention they were boycotted by the other correction administrators

because they couldn't understand why the let the cat out of the bag. >> let me ask each one of you about the impact of your stories. the think the blacks lights which created the huge era when that story was printed still exists? >> no, actually bush ordered the last month ordered all of the prisoners sent to guantanamo, 14 of them that were still left which was about a year after the story was ran and then close the final one after obama became president they closed the final one which was in afghanistan so than this led to a number of investigations on capitol hill which is a little ironic because some of those people that were calling for the investigations knew what was happening. but when the democrats have little power at that time they

said very little and became the majority and then they started using it for the political the advantage. and really that's when things started happening. although overseas in europe day immediately had many investigations every country in the world was required almost by the population to investigate and see whether they had a secret prison and the way that they were arranged with the heads of intelligence agency or the president who usually were no longer in power so that governments have all denied that they had in the prisons where the ad. however, the records show the planes landed in certain places and there is the belief about where they were. >> your articles definitely

changed. >> in this case i think it's more of the diffuse the issue dealing with the whole system there's been a number of investigations launched and gates says he wants to review our intelligence programs to cut out the redundancy. i think that it is something that is moving but it's at a slow pace because again, there are 18 agencies, separate and independent and the process is what it is. the congress has a lot of the vested interest of not changing things and who wants to ever say we are not spending enough on counterterrorism? >> as the new orleans police department changed any significant as a result of -- [applause] >> since we started the cycle of reporting in 2007, eight people have been indicted as a result of the reporting so there was

one person still indicted on hate crimes charges for shooting an african-american man in the face allegedly because of his race because two officers indicted for lobbying about the shooting of the man in the back after hurricane katrina, he died and then there were the five officers indicted in connection to killing henry glover, and like you said, one of them got 25 years and another got 17 years and third is awaiting sentencing and two of them were acquitted. but what i thought about giving these stories over the last ten years is that those things helped reform institutions, sending people to prison for killing citizens, that helps reform them. it doesn't do enough so. it's the beginning of that process. and the kind of broad process is underway in new orleans that the federal government and the justice department started the civil side investigation and the

police department and we want to go beyond just charging these individual cases come and at least 158 page report of the findings document in systemic ongoing civil rights violations by the department what is likely to happen if the department of justice will go into court with the police department they will get the consent decree and that would lead to a judge monitoring the department over three or five for an unlimited number of years and there will probably be a 3250. checklist that will be hey, these are the things you need to improve in the department. citizen complaints citizens can actually come plan and have their complaints heard. internal affairs comes a the officers effectively investigate misconduct by other officers use of force some people aren't

getting shot in the back on necessarily. and that process is likely to go on for years, but it has the possibility of dramatically transforming the department in a way that goes beyond just spending handful of officers to prison. >> you have been back to iraq since your article. do you think that there has been any shift change in that relationship between civilian leaders and the people actually running in which the power has gravitated or maybe even mistaken by the military and also any change -- to emphasize the very important strategic policy and which they try to minimize the civilian casualty that made the soldiers feel they were more of risk. has there been any change in that the change in command or is the military just such a large organization that it doesn't change?

>> i think it is still the to the significant military problem and we see that the next few months as the white house tries to push for the drawdown of american troops on the deadline and general petraeus will try to resist that. in terms of the civilian casualty issue airstrikes that's pretty significant and these are all incidents the would lead to more civilian casualties and there was also the incident where the whole town was wiped out and then we are now rebuilding it knowing there are no casualties there but clearly, i think also there's no difference in the rules of engagement there has been -- begin your pc's if there were 854,000 people who have top-secret clearance. that doesn't even include a

previously obscure private bradley manning who had clearance for classified information. there must be over a million people. how, if there are so many people who have assets to the classified or top-secret information think so widely disseminated, how can you keep a secret, and should you keep this secret? >> there are secrets i think should be secret there's many others and i would never argue that there aren't. but every panel and a body that's overlooked classification issues in the system things are over classifiedings are over classified and that's the

safeway to do too much. so that's one issue. there is a message for keeping people having clearance, you may do background checks at the top levels, they have a secret court rules on these issues, we don't have as much rights as we were the normal course and because the economic incentive to keep the clearance to make more money in the private sector in the clearance of the people are pretty careful. however it's in this other thing happening in parallel. one is the government is classified and for years over classified in things and then hiding the separate compartments they get cut up into little different layers of secrecy and that is one of the problems we

found. on the one hand because of technology and social media and what we can do with a computer, you have wikileaks and i don't think that is necessarily going to stop because there are many systems that are supposed to be secure and as this one episode was shown also people say why did private man and have access to those cables? i think it is a pretty darn good question, and i don't at all -- i have big problems with julian asange and his personality but disinformation that has come out in the cables is fascinating and

important and by and large we've only been doing things i think in the right way -- i think that is also if our foreign policy rests on with the public and secrecy with dictators it's critical level. >> the diplomats should have a right table back home what they think of the leader or to plan now the leaders saying it is correct. what do you think and do you describes himself as a reporter, is in fact functioning as a reporter, do you think what he did was heroic, valuable, deplorable. specter think the first thing is

wild to me i see the parallel between the cables that we've learned about in the church commission hearings back in the 70's they are not dramatic like those like let's topple the government but it's interesting that 40 years later we have the same sort of revelations coming from that communications mode. deriding what he did was heroic? i don't know. i don't know that most things are heroic. i think that it had this incredible, obviously it had this incredible impact and for journalists in one way the important thing that's done is it's made the idea of journalism the concept of journalism interesting to people beyond our certain that people did talking about journalism again the started talking about the importance stories because of that and i think that that is weirdly interesting and an important impact that he has had that that has had. is he a journalist or not? i think that he is a person who has found a way to bury useful

information out of the specific target groups and part of the target groups are other hacker type computer expert nerds who have access to this information and those are not often people that we as journalists think about cultivating as sources and that is kind of a julia's move frankly. >> on the comment from the column last week in the sunday magazine that gives you the sense of this new world says the digital age has changed the dynamics of disobedience and at least one respect. it used to be someone who wanted to cheat on the secrecy had to work at it. daniel ellsberg tried for a year to make the pentagon papers public. there was a lot of time to have second thoughts were to get caught. it is now at least theoretically possible for a whistle-blower or a traitor to act almost

immediately and anonymously click on the web site, kaput a file, go home and wait. what do you think about the whole wikileaks business, has it changed journalism forever, is that an area getting into computers is something that journalists should know more about and began to cultivate? >> i think in terms of mr. keller's description of that i don't think that's accurate in terms of what readily manning did which is over a period of time. bradley manning's lady gaga's cd he popped in for the files. where he was -- >> i see a world now in which this kind of thing can happen. >> and i think in terms of this the internet -- so much data on the internet that's vulnerable, one of the interesting things

that is anonymous to a bunch of activists who had been the offenders of wikileaks, and you know, acting to the e-mail account as a contracting agency and tons of incredible material so there is a change i'm very wary of any sort of pronouncements about the future of journalism that's changed it's just another way to get more information and one of the funny things say wikileaks now fulfills the watchdog function the traditional media field to do but then the "washington post" who does a great job of the watchdog but i think it's quite interesting that clearly what julian asange has done for the need to pierce through the secrecy in a way that no one else has been able to do. >> i feel we are approaching question time, so if you do have a question comes down to either side of the ogle, line up in

front of the microphone. meanwhile i would ask quickly have you faced the reprisals for anything you've written or threats? i know you had some problems i think after -- >> after the story of the house and the senate leaders called for an investigation to the "washington post" and the service gets went on tv and remember this is a different time and they went on television and called for the same thing we did a real hostility. i got that e-mails come lagat e-mails the current civil and that sort of thing. >> michael, did you encounter a lot of complaints? >> it's interesting one of the sort of interesting aspects to the story -- and you touched upon it in your question and the

question period when asked should you have reported the that was the question you sort of told to me, and that was the response that a number of other journalists had as well. and to me what it eliminated was the sort of extremely cozy relationship fact many in my profession had established with very powerful figures and how much they cherished relationship and the idea that anyone could threaten that causes great consent so the most sort of vicious kind of attack are from my colleagues. but one of the reasons i think it is somewhat ridiculous some of the criticism is that basically the criticism is this guy wrote down what he heard and saw we definitely are not supposed to do that. those are direct quotes from what people were saying.

[applause] and as i said it is the sort of fema that has now been. if general mcchrystal were not a popular person, if he were a leader of a gang and i wrote down what he said no one would be on cnn saying was that off the record? i mean, that's what i just said. >> have you faced difficulties because of what you have written? >> there were a couple of dicey moments in new orleans to in the hate crime story. we made contact with somebody in the neighborhood where the hate crime occurred and this person said don't come here. we know who you are. we know who did the shootings we don't have a problem with it if you come over here expect that your life is in serious jeopardy. spam to be in a cab driver is a much more dangerous.

i don't take that seriously. it's more dangerous to do other >> the difference between what he was doing and what we were doing in the stories they didn't exactly write letters to editors , no, you go on high alert and you've got to feel for the tolerance level and you know that this is going to mess up some heads and security and intimidate and certainly in the

prison. >> you have a question? >> i just want to say that a good the number of rules like for example he said he didn't write it down off-the-cuff comments or some rule of that kind i was wondering when it comes down to the bottom line what kind of rahm rules are you stating for you're hanging out with the mcchrystal and was it his fault perhaps he didn't follow these ground rules that you have in mind? if he is expected to be fired, he would have tried to withdraw

or to put all this stuff down. >> i guess i would say that -- i'm not trying to be a smartass here although it takes effort from the putative i apologize. there are four decades with a flea profile looks like and when a public figure invites them to tagalong even if it is just for an hour or a few days or four months, it would suggest a rule of thumb is the expectation of privacy is much diminished and in fact feces' a journalists he writes down might end up in print. so what do they expect of the story? i don't know what exactly the sort of expected, but it's a

double-edged sword because they are performing for the audience and this is what i have always sort of thought and they knew what made a good place to install the and so this idea for them party in paris or hanging out and being the kind of macho supertarget guys that they are i always thought that was part of it for the -- >> i don't know. what they do in up -- will end up saying i haven't talked to them because they haven't commented on the story. >> this whole issue largest want to interject profiles and what you really don't reveal has been discussed for years and years. some of you may remember 1989 called the journalist and the

murder in which he wrote about joe mcginnis who began a book on a man named jeffrey macdonald, telling mcdonald he believed he was innocent thereby gaining access to some private papers and then when the book came out, it was a kind of strong case for his conviction. if i remember the first sentence in the article, it is a shocking opening but it says any journalist who is not a fool or doesn't know what is going on what it meant that what he does is morally indefensible. that question is the sweeping indictment of the field but there are -- it created that year because there are sometimes little vitriol that golan in any profile writing that is to say you don't always open up and tell the person what you're expecting and looking for things and it's a natural -- -- deacons

too it is not to the journalist to narrow the old to become their own field. it is up to the subject to set the ground rules if they want to limit what is on in the background. why do they handcuffed themselves? >> the subject is in the case here and probably with janet malcolm's subject is if it's somebody who doesn't know much about journalism somebody from the street interviewing a think journalists or under an obligation. >> if you're in the public eye and ask the public affairs people it is their responsibility to set and maintain them and raise to the highest level of command it's kind of strange. >> i'm glad you mentioned that backseat driving is more dangerous than journalism because i wanted to ask the

question about a journalist who was a taxi driver and muckraking journalist at the same time and is now on death row. i want to ask something for all of you if you feel any connection with him as the community journalist if you feel any passion about it's also connected to bradley manning who is a whistle-blower in prison and a lot is being written about his rights being violated as well as jamal's writes. >> do want to handle that? >> storm ike i don't know much that much about jamal's qassam fortunately. there are a lot of people who are caught up in the criminal-justice system and some of the more famous and i still don't know.

and, but, you know, i think what you're saying is light and there is a fellowship or a community of journalists or something that's where feeling about why don't know, i intend to try to answer your question and i don't know i am concerned that i don't know the case well enough we have been treated fairly or unfairly i don't know much about it. >> why does the would be treated fairly because i know it's like not to be treated fairly. some of them clutching his bigger degree the editorial bill bradley manning say in the media out what should chip in for his defense not just the defense of wikileaks that the government to prosecute a case and i think

there's a compelling argument to be made that to see if he is the one of the sort of great sources of journalists in history where the newspapers and magazines use this stuff all the time that he leaked all the time there's something to be said to advocate on his behalf so they don't spend as much. >> this is mostly for michael but i threw it to the rest of the panel, too would you think the legacy of the pat tallman case is for journalists and also for the country? >> i think the legacy speaking personally what pat tallman's family did to uncover the truth was incredible, gut-wrenching i don't know how the kept at it for so long and that is just my sort of personal feeling about. clearly there has always going to be this the pentagon that's going to spend the mets' right away and to the extent to step

back that to me the legacy is the fact that it's family has been able to tell the story and keep in the public mind >> they've been protected and then it takes work to get sunshine on the facts by nature like that that's why we have protections because the boundaries figure that out a long time ago and set it up that we saw we could keep poking at them. >> i have a couple of quick questions for dana. what extent you think the security apparatus you uncovered is directed downward towards the four men and what is to correct it in words and how do you see that trending and also to what

extent do you believe the various government and corporate agencies operate through soft power like this information and misinformation using their connections and what do they operate through hard power like meeting people disappear and extraordinary rendition and things like that and how do you see that trending? >> because the defense department is the largest by far the largest of all the intelligence agencies, they are directed outward, and so even the presence in the united states they have a bigger mission now in the united states because the northern command but it's not really sustained so most is directed our word. however, the article i did was on the domestic the department

homeland security and some other things, and really there is a incremental trend towards putting things about you in a database because you might have done something that some police officers and some person walking on the street might have fought looked suspicious that can get you into the database you won't have the right to know about. it's called the guardian, the fbi database, and because the technology, the commercially available i've noticed because i asked my researcher to do this, we have this commercially available technology and i can find anybody is security in here, i can find out what credit cards you have and where you lived since you were 18. it's all there and the companies, they can find out

your training habits, your -- all about now to the fbi because the commercial trend and the drag that approach how i view it is the campaign is a dragnet approach to send a frigate out there, see if there's any interesting to come along and the ones they don't really know about in case they can find something down the road. instead of moving what has worked out a little bit better is the fbi focused counterterrorism investigations with help from others, and the second one, you know, don't agree most of these agencies

operate in any way or manner the operate under the rules passed by the way is the renditions are all signed off on by the council at the cia and the conspiracy theory because the government in general [inaudible] to sort of complete. so soft power especially when it comes to counterterrorism the military again is the big player there and they are not equipped to train the institutions that are the state department which is completely atrophied into the

context agency they are under resource to and there is no hope in the future i don't think to get any better because there is no constituency in congress and of little of it with in the united states unfortunately. >> i appreciate your energy and reporting, and i wanted to ask about your position as a free lancer. i encountered some crimes by the u.s. army and i presented it goes to producers of the major networks all of them said to me, you know, this is important, we have no doubt this is true. we are not going to run this story. one of them put it to me very bluntly. he said look, we are not michael hastings. we have a relationship with the

top officials at the pentagon revealing these crimes that damage that relationship michael can, support and we can't do that. >> the question is do you believe that that's true? >> well, i think -- thanks for your kind words and i get the nation on my kindle all the time, so whatever store you have, give me an e-mail and we will talk to the agent at new york stone. [laughter] i think in my view they've been doing great stuff with him dickinson and i can list of and one of the functions is to not have to worry about things like that, like we are able to go

there because we don't have a table of the white house correspondents' dinner, but i think also one of the things is i talked to people that the pentagon all the time, and they talk to me, not sometimes because they want to, not because they like me or liked my socks. [laughter] the talk to me because they know that it's in their interest to say that hastings got a better respond to the e-mail even if it is just to go have a nice day. so i think my experience has been you can do these stories and it's not -- its has many benefits and drawbacks. >> we have time for one or two more.

>> do you believe they are responsible for the public a government or personal interest when investigating and what are the risks that journalism face, to anybody -- were the risks in taking when you are dealing stores? >> this covers the second one pretty much. >> the first question again? >> when your report and investigate is it to the government or your personal interest? >> following -- >> when you investigate on your stories. is it chiefly you believe that it's for the public, for the government, or because you're interested in investigating the

story? >> the story is that compel me but i feel like are worth working with my team and my colleagues going after four years to get. its story is that i think matter that are going to pull to have some impact in the world, and that is why i want to do them. and occasionally they end up being liked aliens in space, no one can hear you scream and no one cares about your story but it's great when they do and that's why i want to do that. it's for the broad public. >> when you were doing all these -- it was all about trying to make a difference. it's not that that many people get out but to like to have the power to really make a difference for good. and, you know, and present being

editor i can pick out whatever. i know where the problem is quite often i know the story before you even start investigating it, and i know what the outcome is going to be. and you just pick one and for the same reason, the one that excites you the most and the one you will have the greatest impact and will make the biggest difference, and the other thing you have to always after you do all that you figured out okay, would bring you down, it's never brought us down. it's just a great feeling. you know, when you can do something and, you know, the thing i always love is when i finished the story, the greatest conflict you could tell me if i didn't agree with you but you know, i didn't know that.

>> last question. [applause] >> i apologize. this is also for mr. hastings. you mentioned earlier that this story exposes the contempt for civilians in of the military. well, isn't that a bit redundant in the sense that the new wage a war it already has contempt for the civilians? >> that's rhetorical, but the second part of the question is do you get the sense covering the war in afghanistan and the war in iraq and how these guys are dragging their feet when people call for a deadline to end this and you mentioned they are still continuing the raid and the strikes do you think

there is a sense they want the public and america and the public and these occupied countries to get used to the idea? >> in terms of the sort of -- the question is what is it me to kind of be at work for the decade and then reasoned, the recent exclusion and libya as well, and i think whether it is intentional or not i think it's clear that the -- we as the public and me as a human being and journalist we get immune to what happens to the civilians especially when it happens in other countries, so i don't know if that is the intent but it's certainly the consequence. one of the sort of weird ironies is -- rolling stone did a story

last week which had a really terrific photos about this unit of american soldiers that had gone out and killed civilians and set them up and it's really terrific stuff. and it's about 48 hours. but it's really one of the issues i agree with the security fence along the rumsfeld who said just yesterday the sticker to the two-story shouldn't be much bigger than that would be great and why wasn't it? and you know, something is screwed up when rumsfeld is also leading rolling stone. [laughter] but, i am interested to hear the other panelists have to say and how they've gotten desensitized to some of this news. ..

>> you know, i think that's reader fatigue, and you always face it as a journalist, and you also face editor fatigue. one more story about what? you know, that's why we don't have, i think, we have a lack of imagine nation about recording on poverty here, the economic downturn and what it did to people. our editors wanted those stories, on the other hand what they didn't want and i don't think you want either is a story you read the first paragraph and you know what the story is going to say. i'm not saying that's what all stories are like, but i think

that makes a case for the new platforms that we have at our fink l tips that are still -- fingertips but not used to the full extent because you can use the written word with video and make something all the more powerful and seem new, and, it is new for those involved. >> one more question, please. i'm pushing -- >> go for it. [laughter] >> well, in my opinion, the two items to print is the interpret. it relies heavily on ads, do your investigative reports conflict with sponsors? >> we had an interesting case in top secret america. first of all, no, they don't. we're sprit. you know, if there's someone in

the advertising department who doesn't -- they never discuss anything with the newsroom about what they should or shouldn't be doing because it might lose or gain ads. in fact, they make a point if there's a story about, you know, a car -- like, there's a story that criticizes or glorifies something, they will not put an ad that is in the related field next to it, and the same thing happened with top secret america. they decided on the website they would have no ads for the first month i think it was just to, i don't know, in readers' minds sometimes we don't do a good job explaning ourselves and those things and the editorial page is not the front of the news page. it's church and state, we don't talk to each other, they obviously don't read the paper sometimes. [laughter] sometimes they do. >> a long time ago an editor told me no one buys an ad to put

next to one of your stories. [laughter] it was kind of telling. [laughter] >> i would like to thank our panel. i think it was very interesting. [applause] [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> next on c-span2, the ground breaking ceremony for the edward kennedy institution. former majority leader's portrait is unvailed in the panel, and reporters talk investigative journalism.

>> family and former staff members of senator ted kennedy recently gathered in boston neighborhood for the groundbreaking of the edward m. kennedy institute. it includes tributes to the late kennedy and former long term kennedy a paul kirk.

>> good morning, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for being here, we really do appreciate it. if we could begin to have folks take their seats, we'll have time for pictures a little later. bill, could you sit down, please? thank you. [laughter] what a leader. lieutenant governor is about to take his seat by the treasurer there. we're making real progress here. good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and in so many ways is the khoir was saying just a bit ago, this is the day the lord has made. let us rejoice and be glad. [applause] i was just telling vicky i was walking earlier and looked up at the incredible blue sky with the sunshining down, and i said something that so many of us said so many times in our lives,

thank you, ted. well, people will take credit for much of what happens, we give him the responsibility and credit for this beautiful day, and it's so typical of what ted kennedy wanted. it's not about ted in so many different ways, but it's about the future, and it's about teaching people how our government works, and it's about giving young people a sense of purpose and hope. one day eddy and i were talking about what this place is, and eddy said, you know, for kids like you and me, if we came to the institute, we'd never go home, and if you haven't had a chance yet to look at what the place will look like, there's reppedderringings -- renderings outside the tent to the left and there's a model. if you haven't already, take the time to look at the model.

at the core of what we have is a representation of the u.s. senate and the hundred seats and desks there will come alive for young people and everybody in this tent helped to make that happen. i want to thank you so much. couple of notes here for you. the institute is an important part of umass boston, and when you join umass boston, you become part of a family, and the folks at umass boston could not have been kinder or more effective in making this work, and so for all the people who are here who work were umass boston, from the baht father or mother of -- bottom of our hearts, thank you so much for what you did and what you do. [applause] by the way, when you look at the model and the renderings, one of the things you have to think about that kennedy would be so

thrilled with is the building will be built entirely with union labor. [applause] we would have had a rainy day if we were not doing that. ted would have -- i think that's true. a couple people i'd like to acknowledge as we begin this morning. two of the founding mothers of the board -- members of the board of the directors, senator pall kirk and dave burke no longer on the board but deserve so much credit for what we do. [applause] our architect who, and as you look at the building, you'll see what he did. he was able to take the notion as vicky and ted talked to historians about what this could be, and fit it into the campus here at umass, and it looks like

it's part of the facility that i am paid to design so many decades ago. our architectture is a dear friend. [applause] you know, for those of us who follow what's in washington, and it would be hard not to do that this week, for anybody who came to be with us today, it's an extraordinary venture, and as you may know, those folks will have to go back. we're blessed to have speaker pelosi with us this morning. [applause] [cheers and applause] i did mention former congressman bill who has been such a supporter of the institute and his colleague former congressman

from massachusetts, the lieutenant governor is here as well as our state treasurer, and you'll hear from some of the other elected officials who are here. thank you so much for being a part of this. i mentioned last night that joe biden described the secret of ted kennedy's success, and it was always about doing things for others, and the institute is that, a way to do things for the people of this country and in particular for young people, so when you leave here today, please take a look at the model, please walk with the sense of purpose of what the institute is. it is what senator kennedy wanted it to be, an institute to teach people about our government, and in particular to have young people become incredibly excited about the united states of america and how we work, and a woman who does that every day, day in and day out, an incredible supporter of

the institute, the son of president from massachusetts, terry murray. [applause] >> good morning, and welcome on this absolutely beautiful day. i have a resolution from the senate, but there is a resolution also here from the house of representatives. congratlating the institute for the united states senate on its historic groundbreaking whereas the kennedy m. institute breaks ground on a state of the art for a minute on friday, april 8, 2011 and the institute was conceived by the late senator as an institution designed to educate students of all ages

about american democracy and to inspire future generations to engage in the public square and whereas the institute as far as to preserve the united states senate's past e lym nate -- illuminate its present and lead into the future and ted kennedy in decades of service to the commonwealth and country provided dedicated leadership on major issues beginning with his maiden speech in the united states senate in support of the civil rights act of 1964, and whereas the institute has honored senator kennedy's legendary commitment to public education by forming a partnership with the university of massachusetts boston that will benefit each institution for decades to come and whereas the new beautiful institute accommodates the library and attracts thousands of visitors annually to the columbia point in the city of boston -- thank

you, therefore, be it resolved that the massachusetts senate hereby congratulates the senator ted m. cede di institute of the united states senate on its historic groundbreaking and this transmitted by the clerk of the senate to the institute for the united states senate and signed by all body massachusetts senators. [applause] >> i want to apologize to the attorney general who is here with us. [applause] when something like this happens, so many people get to take vows.

the staff of the edward kennedy institute has done an incredible job of getting things ready today. i want to mention paul remmy, chris cole, chris mccarthy, and the person who pulled things all together, lisa mcburney, thanks to all of you for the work you've done. [applause] a dear friend of the senators and everybody in the room, a man who makes things happen at the house, the speaker of the house. >> thank you very much, peter, and not a big day is opening day by the way, let's not forget that, and the red sox are starting a winning streak today

as a matter of fact. [applause] the last prediction was that peter meade was going to retire. so much for my predictions. [laughter] thank you, peter, for that kind introduction, and it's a pleasure for me to join with my colleague in the senate and to join with you today to bring the greetings and best wishes for the massachusetts house of representatives. today we celebrate the enduring commitment to public service of our beloved senator, edward m. kennedy, a leader without equal, not only here in massachusetts, but across this nation i'd like to extend my appreciation to all those whose hard work and dedication has made this day a reality. like all of you, i am anxiously

awaiting the opening of the edward m. kennedy institute of the united states senate to help bring alive america's great history and inspire young people to serve the greater good just as ted kennedy did with such devotion for so many years. it's be fitting that this beautiful new facility will be located next to the john f. kennedy presidential library which for 30 years has helped define the boston water front. i can't think of a better place to showcase the lasting impact of the two senator kennedys from massachusetts in the entire kennedy family for that matter on the civic life of the nation. i'm really happy to be here today to celebrate the new beginning because ted kennedy's

focus was always on the future. he'd never stop fighting for a better tomorrow, for the people of massachusetts, and the united states. he never stopped searching for ways to build a more perfect union for all the the american people, and as we confront today's challenges, this institute will keep senator kennedy's vision and ideals alive for the people of massachusetts and the united states. congratulations and god bless all of you. thank you very much. [applause] >> you know, the speaker mentioned the jfk library, and mentioned to paul kirk one time, i've never gone in that building without being inspired. i think the same will be true of the institute we're about to build, and one of the things you need to know, i mentioned one of the neighbors of umass boston,

the folks at the kennedy library from the beginning whether it's events we've done at the library or helping with any suggestions as we begin on how we make things work, and i want to publicly thank our friends at the jfk library for the great work they have done with us. [applause] so many people who are callings of ted kennedy always talked about you can trust his word, you knew -- he knew how to do all the work of the senate, and the person there through most of that career with him, a fellow from connecticut represented in the connecticut senate by my sister io legal, a man who that been an incredible friend, a force for safety in banking for this country when it was nod easy to do, chris dodd from connecticut. [applause]

years ago, vicky and ted had a number of us at the house on the cape and talking about the institute and what it could be and wop of the suggestions was that it could go to another college, and it wasn't emerson college. [laughter] and the senator said he wanted it at umass boston, and he was clear about that. he understood how important it would be for himself, for the people at umass boston. we have a great university system in massachusetts, and the man who was led it for the last several years has been a member of our board, a sit leader in massachusetts, and a dear friend of the kennedy institute, chad wilson. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much, peter. this really is a wonderful day for the university, and it's a wonderful day for our

commonwealth and for the nation, for everyone who cares about public service, this is a wonderful day, and it was why the red sox were waiting to kick off their season until this could happen. we know that. [laughter] the university of massachusetts has been an inthews yays tick partner in the effort because we believe this institute for the united states senate will be a dynamic force for generations to come. it's a place where students come to lerp about the senate and about our american democracy. it's a place where scholars explore the issues of our time and help us child support -- chart a course for the future and it's a place where citizens come to reflect on our american experience and to find inspiration. public service is the idea that drove the senator. his deal to serve illuminated his life, and public service is what senator kennedy reppedderred to massachusetts and to this -- rendered this massachusetts and this nation in sing giew lar

fashion. we'll capture the service that senator kennedy and others provided in the past and hopefully fan the flame of service for generations to come, and i want to thank vicki kennedy for her friendship, wisdom, dedication to the project. senator kennedy's voice sounded the call for so many, and vicky's voice, well, a little bit quieter is no less inspirational or persuasive. we wouldn't have made it here without you. senator kennedy left massachusetts so many gifts and certainly one of those great gifts is our friend and colleague, vicky kennedy. [applause] [applause] also i want to acknowledge all of my colleagues from the university of massachusetts with us today. i'll note a few of them, sorry i can't name them all, but i want

to point out that jim, chairman of the board of trustees in his second term as chairman who also has a clear passion for public service, and david mckinsey who building directer has been involved with this project and will continue to be as we build the building. by the way, david is also the former interim chancellor of umass boston and by the way, the interim chancellor of umass law and he too has a life of service. bob is here -- [applause] oh, there's fans in the audience. [laughter] he's got fans ever where. he flies that blimp across the stadium. is it flying today? the fbi? he's chairman of the umass building authority charged with building the building and later this month honored for a lifetime of service, but particularly also let me thank

my friend, chancellor keith for all he does for boston and this institution because you have to do a lot to get here. [applause] [applause] thanks to my colleagues on the edward m. kennedy institute board all of whom care so much and woshed so hard to make this day a reality. last, i want to thank the man who made it all possible, senator kennedy, for the confidence and the vision that he displayed in forging this partnership with the university of massachusetts and for understanding the natural connection between a university established to serve the people and his own mission of service to all. we're very honored by that decision, and we'll always work to drive towards his shining legacy. thank you very much. [applause]

i do think that folks in the room know so much about the kennedy family and what it has done and the excellence in pursuit of public service, but few may know that kara kennedy is on the institute board, worked in television, and oftentimes people say things like a labor of love. this is not a labor of love. this is an act of love in the work that she's done for her dad. kara, would you join us at the podium? [applause] [applause] >> thank you, all. thank you so much for everybody coming here especially all those former staffers of dad's. i also would like to thank my kids, grace and max, who took

off from school for two days and now have extra home work to prepare for on monday. [laughter] i'm here to introduce this film that my best friend of 38 years and i were fortunate enough to make and so without further adieu, we'll show the film, okay? thank you. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ >> thanks to the efforts of each and every one of you. we're here to consider another legacy, a man who loved the history and vie -- vibrant institution and no one made the senate come alive like he did. he loved his history and his taste of our american story. there's no greater tribute we can over. it's a living institute where

students, the teachers, and the public can come together and learn about the role of the senate he loved so much. >> it will be a dynamic center of learning and engagement taking advantage of the 21st century technology and have an experience that literally will bring history alive. the centerpiece of the building will be a large theater that can be arranged to recreate the floor of the united states senate. either the current senate chamber or the old chamber where they met from 1810 to 1859. all the desks will be interactive. the history of who sat at that desk and almost limitless amounts of information will be at your fingertips. the hallways and the walls outside the chamber will have

interactive faces as well, and visitor will be able to sit up in a gallery that will overlook the activities on the senate floor. there will be classrooms circling the perimeter of the building for further study, documents and information will be digitized and readily available and can be sorted according to the user's prerch. our goal is to provide each visitor with an insight into the workings of their government that they couldn't get anywhere else. imagine going into to the theater, refiguring it as the old senate chamber and actually becoming one of those senators, henry clay, daniel wester and the others. you would study their positions, negotiate, argue, debate. teddy said there was no more perfect partner for the edward m. kennedy institute than the umass boston, and he loved this

location. here on columbia point next to his brother's library overlooking dorchester bay. my husband's dream was that by immersing yourself in history, reliving the great debates of our time, you would be reminded of the great problems we tackled and great things we achieved when we all came to the table, and you would be inspired to be involved too. >> it is now, especially now, that we need to get people interested in our public problems, and we ignite the faith in our public institutions. great americans together can forge consensus and understand not just the united states senate role in our government, but their role in it as well. >> what we're doing there is going to be something unlike anything anywhere in the world. we're going to bring history alive. mr. reid of rhode island.

♪ ♪ [cheers and applause] ♪ [applause] ♪ >> mr. kennedy. [cheers and applause] ♪ ♪ [applause] >> thanks, kara, and thanks for the tears and all that.

thank you. would you please stand again? [applause] like all of us blessed ton parents, the senator was proud of all of his children, and i think in a special way, ka rrk a, he is particularly proud of you for what you have done. thank you so much. [applause] i mentioned eddy before, and we traveled to israel one time shortly after the invasion of kuwait, and part of what we did in the trip is we met with a group of people from the plo, and they were supporting saddam's invasion of kuwait. it was the kind of thing where generally people are polite and ask a few polite questions and the world was pregnant with

worry and what might happen in the middle east, and eddy looked at the folks and said you will be better to your children and your grandchildren. you will have to explain to them how you made mistake after mistake and never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. i get two reactions. i couldn't believe the boldness of this guy, and i was trying to figure out if we could keep our backs to the wall as we were leaving the room. [laughter] i was impressed with his candor and leadership, and it's a hallmark of him whether we're in the middle east or here in his district or in the halls of congress, a man who stands up for what he believes in and does it all the time, a greater friend of the institute we don't have than our friend ed markey. [applause] [applause] >> thank you, peter, so much,

and thank you for being the great leader for the institute in its first year of existence and thank you vicky for being an inspiration to all of us. you have vision. you asked us all to help and today is the tribute to you that you give to ted, and we all honor you for this vision and commitment which you had and to ted and to kara and to patrick, the likes of his life and you and the whole family, it is our honor to be with you here today. we are so proud of you, and we are so proud to be here with the whole family here today. thank you. [applause] you know, throughout the entire

health care debate, we are here today with along with tip o'neill, the greatest speaker of the house in the history of the united states, nancy pelosi, who made sure that health care and the vision of ted kennedy which she mentioned every day in the democratic caucus for two years came to be a reality for all americans. [applause] [applause] [applause] she wanted to make possible what patrick and terry and bob

deleo already made possible for the citizens of massachusetts. it was what happened in massachusetts that became the model for the rest of the country, and they are now the beneficiaries of the leadership that we have asemibled here -- assembled here today. as peter said, for so many people, washington it just a distant concept. i'm from olden. my father was a milkman. i never visited washington, d.c. until i was worn in as a united states congressman on my first visit to that city. all of us, when we arrived there, it is just this incredible moment of honor. here, at the kennedy institute, children from across this entire region, across this nation will be able to learn about how our

government works, and it will inspire the next generation in the same way that the past several generations have been inspired by the kennedy family, by the brothers, who served as a beacon of hope, not just for the irish or the italians, but of every people of every nationality within this nation and across this planet. there was something born in the 1960s with the kennedy brothers, and it lives on today, and that dawning of a bright light, a better future lifted up the spirit of an entire nation and throughout teddy's unmatched career in public service, he made sure that every one had access to it, and as the nation's greatest senator in history, he made sure --

[applause] that there was a democratization of access of opportunity through education and through health care for every child in this country so that everyone could have not just the dream, but a reality and millions of people across this country now are able to fulfill their dreams because of what teddy was able to do, but with teddy, it was always the make of the man, not just his level of political performance that caused the rest of us to lift our gaze to the constellation of possibilities that were out there, not only our own possibilities, but our own potential, our possibilities to help the world within which we lived, this magnificent

institute will give the next generation of americans the guide stars, service, historical understanding, and idealism which enlightened mind and encourage full participation in our vibrant democracy. teddy always knew that the past was just a memory and the future was the hard reality for the poor and the sick and the elderly and the disabled, and he never allowed nostalgia to replace idealism that had us fighting for a future that was better for every citizen in our country, and he inspired all of us to take up that fight. the edward m. kennedy institute will be a learning laboratory where young men and women delve into the history of our country and participate in great debates on the issues that animate the

american experience. the institute will be at the cutting edge of architectural design. of course, there's no building that could match the strength of teddy's soul. there is no material that could replicate the fiber of his character. there is no ark architecture that could even begin to scrape the heights of teddy's vision, but yet in this manmade edifice, it will be conveyed the essence of teddy, and it will be such a fantastic and innovative structure. when i imagine the activity within the institute's walls, i think of all the incredible energy that will be generated. i imagine the son of an irish-american iran worker from pittsburgh dating the daughter of a brazillian-american bus

driver. i think of the american teaming up with a son of a haitian american hairdresser to research proposals on early education programs #-b and i see the same debates taking place with the children of every state in our country and across the world here, here at one of the great urban universities in the united states, the right place for this institute, the university of massachusetts at boston led my keith motley, jack wilson, led my all of these wonderful young men and women who are the heart and soul and future of our country, and it is those debates which will spread the dreams across town, across our nation, across the world building bridges of understanding. for teddy, education was always

more than books. it was an opportunity, an experience to be grasped every day. teddy found knowledge while in the grip of a colleague or a constituent's hand. he found vision in grafting the tiller of his sailboat or at his lecture at the senate floor and found joy in his children and ground children and felt love in the arms of his dear vicky and fulfillment across multitudes of the victories in the world that his good works were able to touch. now, with this incredible institute, this hub of history, the educational opportunities that teddy created will be multiplied and made available to students, to teachers, to legislatures, and to all those involved in public service at the institute and far beyond its walls, teddy's lion heart, and

the echo of his words will stir new service enabling the leaders of tomorrow to learn, to participate, and to dream about a better world. thank you all so much and thank you, kennedy family, for what you have done. [applause] [applause] >> ed mentioned the university of massachusetts here at boston. i want to introduce to you one of the graduates of the university of massachusetts boston. man, i was proud to represent rosanne me and the house of representatives for many years. congressman joe kennedy. [applause] [applause] >> when i started this job at the institute, i was talking to

my young nephew, and he was saying he had met our next speaker a couple of times, and he said, so do you get to work with him? i said, yeah, i do. he said, he's way cool. [laughter] he is that. he is one of the great advocates, a man who leads this university, and you can see it on the edge of where it's going to always be a better and better place where everyone in this country can be proud of the people who were here, of what they do here, and what they will do in our world, the way cool chancellor of umass boston, keith motley. [applause] [applause] >> i can't wait to go home and tell my children that. [laughter] when they see me in those gym

trunks from 1980 -- [laughter] and those sneakers and all those things, they don't think i'm that cool. [laughter] good morning, everybody. >> good morning. >> welcome to boston's public university, the only one, the university of massachusetts boston. we're so grateful to have you here. it's your university, so thank you for coming out and being a part of what we see every day. it was unbelievable, vicky, to talk up here this morning and feel the buzz of everyone in excitement, and so thank you, the family, the board, and everyone else for getting us here. now, i know i'm here to celebrate the educational partnership between the edward m. kennedy institute for the united states senate and the university of massachusetts boston, and i know i'm not supposed to tell you that this

campus has 16,000 students and have unbelievable faculty and 900 students come from 30 different countries and speak 90 languages. the mayor is an alumni. i know i'm not supposed to say that, but we do support whole heartedly the goal of the institute to illuminate the great debates of the senate staff, but i'm al here to tell you that these moments in history inspire our present and they also inform tomorrow's leaders, and i'm going to show you some of that, and we're going to see this work today. one such moment that we're so proud of in those times, and this is a time that many of us up in this room can relate to was the 1964 debate over the civil rights agent. this bill was filibustered for

57 days and timely broken in june of 1964. the first time in united states history that a filibuster had been broken in the senate on a civil rights bill. perseverance, per veerns, -- perseverance, perseverance paid off. our senator, our senator, ted kennedy, someone so near to my heart, understood that quality very, very, very well. the edward m. kennedy institute will use historic senate debates like this to help make our legislative process accessible in engaging to a wide audience. it was senator kennedy's wish for visitors to the institute would come to understand how senators of both parties work

together to address the great challenges facing our country. it was his hope that visitors would leave this institute inspired to civic action and inspired to involvement. now, in 1964, 47 years ago tomorrow, edward m. kennedy made his first spheech in the -- speech in the senate urging his fellow legislators to pass the civil rights act. his eloquence, his passion of commitment to all will be echoed time and time again throughout his career as a united states senator, so on this historic

day, it's both a preview of the educational offerings of the institute and a try butte to the champ upons of civil rights in the senate and also for me to show off the caliber of students we have at the university of massachusetts and particularly at the university of mass boston. we invited three of our students from the university of massachusetts boston to bring alive the historic debate on the civil right act of 1964. they will be reading excerpts from senators hubert humphrey, democrat from minnesota, edward kennedy, democrat from massachusetts, and edward dirksen, republican from illinois. now, come up here, a junior and

coordinator will read an excerpt from senator hubert's address delivered on march 30th 1964. [applause] >> thank you. it's an honor to be here. mr. president, i cannot over imp size the historic importance of the debate we are beginning. we are participants in one of the most crucial eras in the long and proud history of the united states, and, yes, in man keep's struggle for justice and freedom which has gone forward since the dawn of history. if freedom becomes a full reality in america, we can dare

to believe it will become a reality ever where. if freedom fails here in america, the land of the free, what hope can we have that it will survive elsewhere? the golden rule shows what we are attempting to do in the civil rights legislation. do unto others as you would have them do unto you. if i went to castle to try to do what you are doing, it would be to fulfill this great admiration which is the human rule of relations. if we are to have justice, tranquility, peace, and freedom. the bill has a simple purpose, to give fellow citizens the same rights white people take for granted. it is no more than the constitution guarantees. surely, the goal of this bill is

not too much to ask for the senate of the united states. thank you. [applause] >> oh -- here we go, here we go. [laughter] now, a senior marketing -- majoring in environmental earth and ocean sciences, but also an undergraduate student president, and so come on up. he's going to read an excerpt from senator kennedy's first speech to the united states senate from april 9, 1964. [applause] >> how did i get so lucky? yeah, exactly. [laughter] i have to take this opportunity

with all these great leaders here to mention i'm graduating. [laughter] [applause] i'm taking job offers. [laughter] i'm very eager and up spired by this institute to be a public servant, so i was a former union organizer. [cheers and applause] i'll probably be knocking on congressman markey's door because i share a passion for environmental sciences, health care, thank you, speaker pelosi, and higher ed, so thank you, chancellor motley. >> you're welcome. [laughter] i'm honored to read a portion of this senate speech in april 1964 when senator kennedy said, mr. president, it is with some hesitation that i rise to speak

on the pending legislation before the senate. a freshman senator should be seen, not heard, should learn, and not teach. it is true that prejudice exists in the minds and hearts of men. it can want be eradicated by law, but i firmly believe a sense of fairness and good will also exists in the minds and hearts of men. this noble characteristic wants to come out. law expressing as it does the loyal conscious of the community can help it come out in every person so in the end the prejudice will be dissolved. as a young man, i want to see an america where everyone can make his contribution, where a man will be measured not by the

color of his skin, but by the content of his character. i remember the words of president johnson last november 27th. no memorial or eulogy could more eloquently honor president kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. my brother was a first president of the united states to state publicly that segregation was morally wrong. his heart and his soul are in this bill. if his life and death had a meaning, it was that we should not hate, but love one another. we should use our powers not to create conditions of oppression that lead to violence, but conditions of freedom that lead

to peace. it is in that spirit that i hope the senate will pass this bill. april 9, 1964. [applause] >> if you noticed, we -- our students learned to use their time well. [laughter] i know the senator is probably looking down saying what is wrong today with you, keith? you have these two guys up here, and so now, finally, come on up here juliet. she's a junior and has a double major, and she will share the words of senator minority leader edward m. dirksen in june 1964.

[applause] >> hi, everyone, i'm honored and humbled to be here. i'm just going to jump right into it. today, the senate is still mended in its effort to enact a civil rights bill. there's many reasons why cloture should be invoked. it is said on the night that he died, victor hugo wrote in his diary stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come. the time has come for equality of opportunity and sharing in government, in education, and in employment. it will not be stayed or denied. second, years ago, a professor who thought he developed an incontra veritable premise

submitted it. quickly, they picked it apart. he cried out is nothing eternal? to this, one of his associates replied, nothing is eternal except for change. to those who have charminged me with doing a disservice to my party, and there have been many, i can only say our party finds its faith in the declaration of independence which was pinned by a great democrat, thomas jefferson by name. there he wrote, "we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal." that has been the living faith of our party. do we fore sake this article of faith now that the time forever our decision has come? there is no substitute for basic ideal. we have a duty to use the instruments at hand, namely the cloture rule to bring about the

enactment of a good civil rights bill. i appeal to all senators. we are con prompted with a -- confronted with a moral issue. today, let's us not be found wanting. thank you, guys, very much. [applause] >> so, thank you, and thank all of you here today who are here to celebrate both this institute and this great moment in our country's history to teach, inform, inspire, encourage future generations. thank you, thank you, thank you. [applause] [applause] >> we'll have more music from our choir in a little. keith, were the students from

umass boston? [laughter] i just wanted to make sure. [laughter] in the video that you saw earlier that kara did such a great job on, there's part where there's a button that vicky and ted have for governor duval patrick, and they were happy warriors and campaigns for so many people, but i think for those of us who knew senator kennedy well, the pride he took in the nomination of the democratic party of duval patrick and his election was one of the things he was incredibly proud of. ..

and supporters of this extraordinary moment in incredible miles doing. i'm honored to be here to team that. i just want to thank you because i can tell you we need this institute right now. decades, decade. [applause] decades of poisonous rhetoric about how government is bad, taxes are bad, greed is good. we have begun to jeopardize the spirit of this country. my greatest disappointment is the conservative movement is

that stopping the optimism out of our country. ted kennedy was an optimist. the uniquely american blind of optimism and effort hope and hard work, the understanding in a deal was essential and a fine to make it real for people to make a real contribution and higher contribution of public service. this institute will help not only honor that legacy, but remind ourselves to live it, to live it and knowing if we live it, greatest days are ahead. i'm so pleased and proud to be with you today. god bless you. [applause]

>> how would you like to hear from a fellow who is a mountainous enough the mayor of boston, who up until tuesday, people with by the great judgment. [laughter] when senator kennedy asked me to chair the rose kennedy greenway conservancy, when he called called me to say you're free for lunch. i did look at the calendar. of course i was. he said i just called tom menino. we were sat in a restaurant type of the greenway could be and should be enough. that schlossberg, such an inspiration for the institute and also an inspiration on the institute, on the greenway board, talking about open cream excellence in having as much green space as possible in the interest of the harbor in time

it's ever going back and forth in the mayor had to leave. tommy is leaving the room to do you just love this guy? a man who has done an incredible job is mayor of boston up until tuesday, a guy you can't hope above, the mayor of boston, tom menino. [applause] >> thank you, peter for the introduction. and you're on the payroll, so don't worry about it. [applause] we can always resend those and find some investigative reporter on this. we did a library card four years ago.

[laughter] you know i left that one surely? because i was getting stuck with a check. [laughter] i know teddy. when they were doing an event in roxbury with bill clinton at the archer gardens community center, talking about youth violence and he says to go to lunch. bill clinton says yeah, great i.t. a good clinton says let's go to some fancy restaurant for that. teddy had the smarts to say the mayor will choose a place to go. so he picked up this makes dinner and watch hester street. [laughter] and teddy likes to be. neal nevada. bill clinton doesn't of course i do. [laughter] the best part of the whole lunch was when the bill came.

bill clinton says i don't have any money. [laughter] teddy says of course he had no money. [laughter] so who gets stuck with the click me. i don't say something, folks, this guy ted kennedy is a very special guy. we'll never have a guy like him ever again in this business. [applause] some of the other elected officials, remember when he called your. the other thing you ask about is a sponsored bill. i forgot all about it. he said i'm going to pick the problem up now. he was one of those guys who really was in touch with people

everyday. this government was 30, 40 years and i would government with pay. i'm really happy to join the key and all the family, members of senator kennedy's staff. yet the greatest staff of any elected official. there were just spectacular people. [applause] analogy to help dedicate this institute, a place of public education and learning. a man who taught us all so, so much i tell you. we are so fortunate to have a presidential library right here next to one another. two great institutions name for

two great public servant, both chancellor merkley, my only concern is, don't forget to leave some space for us alumnus. [laughter] you brought it down, okay. it was so inspiring to listen to the students read passages about the civil rights debate. senator kennedy always new and always believed that young people are the future. i remember being that the school in charlestown, first school that was hardwired for the internet. he was there and so proud to see

boston. he was also making sure. we always believed this was a civil rights issue of our time. i know the institute for the senate on civic learning and this institute will be welcoming people for many years. the truth is we may need to buy more red paint to extend the freedom trail is. dozens of children and families will come here every year and may wear the pants and, but not the message. the opportunity we extend to all people no matter what their background. just think about the kennedy institute, the city of boston and our old.

boston's children will no longer just read about the great debate to the senate. though visitor to experience them, too. washington natives in the senate will learn about their career in their own democracy is strengthened, aspiring public servants to her officials here, a career in public service and folks ask you now more than ever to bring inspiring elected officials to what it's all about. they think we're off track. this government is not about teddy. teddy believed in people. an hour off track. we need to get back on track. the greater the potential to save the future and future young

people. folks, we have less teddy's voice. we have not lost his example. his career was immoral for fighting to make sure everyone had success in this country. and that's the institute as well as regular history about some of of called the world most exclusive club. and share with people. i'm so happy it's right over here in rochester, massachusetts. and especially at the university of mass campus. it's a great day. the groundbreaking is always a special day. i look forward to months and weeks later when we have the

folks coming here and learn about government. learn what the senate really means. the fact it has on people's lives. i also think of some of the young people will find what a difference ted kennedy made in so many peoples lives, who he touched in so many different ways. i'm honored to say a few words this morning. thank you all of you, thank you. [applause] there a lot of great days and our commonwealth come a day so we can all be happy and proud of what we do and the kind of leadership is commonwealth provides. today is one of those days. we've talked about the institute and we talked about it being a nonpartisan institute when we talk about the issues of the time and the issues of the past so we eliminate the future.

a tribute to that sense of nonpartisanship and what we can do with the commonwealth. our next speaker, senator scott rowan. [applause] >> first of all, i want to just say welcome to the kennedy family. obviously patrick committed to see you as well. while the elected officials and friends here i haven't seen quite a while in college. i want to thank the kennedy family for their history of service and sacrifice and i've had the privilege actually to speak with vicky on many occasions about her vision for this amazing facility in the sense that you don't learning. i was deeply moved by her passion and enthusiasm to do something very special for her husband and for the family and for commonwealth and for the

country. i told you i would come. [laughter] a little surprise to everybody, isn't it? [laughter] all aside, what does think vicky and patrick for their warm welcome in the transition in becoming the new united states senator. one thing that she would know -- every window he is a legend. me if all people understand the large shoes i have to fill. one thing i always appreciate it was his dedication to service, his sense of humor and the fact that he was so zealous in the way that he thought were the things he truly believed in. i'm not sure if you're aware of this, but i have a picture on my mantle of senator kennedy. one of the reasons i have a theory as to remind me that he worked with all sorts of people. here get democrats and republicans in young, old, black, white, everybody as long

as they had a good hard committee came with an open mind willing to work with them. that's the type of legacy that i hope to lead and use his example in that regard. i just want to close by saying i'm enormously mindful every day of the greatest public honor in my life is the opportunity to serve in the united states senate and also to be here to see all of you. so thank you. i have to go into the business people as governor you were referencing. there are people who want to move things forward regardless of their political party. so i'm going to be heading on a plane that the speaker and author of their colleagues and i apologize for leaving early, but thank you for including me. [applause] >> and just a moment, we will

hear from vicky and folks in the family, but before we do come in just an interlude with the boston community choir. he done such a grand job not today, but other times. thank you so much. you bring such a wonderful, wonderful tribute to the day and to senator kennedy. thank you. [applause] ♪ oh happy day oh happy day oh happy happy day, oh happy happy

day, oh happy day when jesus washed, when jesus washed. oh happy day, oh happy day. oh happy day, oh happy day. when jesus washed, when jesus washed. when jesus washed, he washed my sins away. oh happy day, oh happy day. he taugh me how, to fight, fight

and pray. and they taught me how to live rejoicing. ♪ every day. every day! oh happy day ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day. when jesus washed, when jesus washed. ♪ when jesus washed, he washed my sins away. ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day. ♪ he taugh me how, to wash, fight and pray.

♪ and they taught me how to live. ♪ rejoicing, every day. every day! ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day ♪ oh happy day, oh happy day ♪

oh happy day, oh happy day ♪ and it's a happy day. ♪ good god, it was a happy day. ♪ oh happy day when jesus washed, when jesus washed ♪ he washed my sins away ♪ oh happy day ♪ yes, it was a happy day. ♪ oh happy day ♪ oh happy day

♪ oh happy day! ♪ [applause] >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you. there are those relationships, some that began in a neighborhood, some in an office, some with a boss or employee, where a friendship is a model for all of us emerges, a man who has done so much for the kennedy library, the kennedy family, but most especially for our friend, senator edward kennedy, senator paul curt. [applause]

>> thank you, peter. you're a great pal and you've done so much for the institute that's about to be in so much for city for your continued great career. members of the kennedy family, distinguished guests, is this choir way cool or what? [applause] thank you for helping to make this a choice in glorious morning on columbia point. terrific. congratulations to all of those who for two years of hard work have made it possible to have this and not zero at the edward m. kennedy institute of the united states senate. you've done a great job. this will come as no surprise to

you, but after 40 years of working together on political policy and professional issues and having enjoyed a fun filled and treasured friendship, the most meaningful public honor in my life was to receive the endorsement of the kennedy family and the appointment by governor duval patrick to succeed edward m. kennedy in the senate of the united states. [applause] and so many of our private conversations, he would say, america is a promise. america is a promise our founders passed on to succeeding

generations, each with an obligation to leave it better than they inherited it. to fulfill that promise, like his brothers john and robert before him, he chose a career in politics. ted kennedy was a politician and proud of it. [applause] the institution he chose for his political service was a senate of the united states whose place in our democracy and whose role in our history he truly breviary. in his memoir, "true compass," he wrote the following: to say

that i love the senate does not begin to convey what that institution needs to me. let me put it this way, after nearly half a century, i still cannot get a car headed for the capitol, especially in the evening and clemson in the distance without the hair in my arms stand in a period i've told vicky if ever that site does not move me, i will know it is time to step aside. that elting symbolizes to meet the benevolent power and the majesty of our government. it is awesome to me. not awesome in the reflective way to young people use the word, but in its real sense, its older sense of the broken

reference. being a senator changes a person he said. something fundamental and profound happens to you when you arrive there. and it stays with you all the time when your privilege to serve. i have seen the changes in people who have come into the senate. it may take a year or two years or three years, but it always happens. it fills you with a heightened sense of purpose. edward m. kennedy in his own words. what follows are my word, but i am as sure of them as he was of his and they're worth repeating on this occasion. when histories and finally write

the first 200 years of this republic, it will record that no individual budgets nature from any state or any political party or either house of congress worked harder or longer with the more heightened sense of purpose for the cause of keys and economic and social justice didn't edward moore kennedy, democrat of massachusetts -- [applause] the mayor of this institute. [applause] [applause]

and despite that extraordinary record, he did not want this institute to be limited to his own career or to be a personal nostalgia from oriole to himself, nor to be partisan sender of education. he believed in being part of something larger than oneself and he envisioned a teaching institute larger, rocker and more far-reaching than even his own world, a place for the entire history of the united states senate will, life and educate and inspire others to serve and to work to fulfill america's promise. while senator kennedy was proud to be a politician, in his own way, too, he was a teacher and an educator.