about working out. they are tryingo reach a compromise so we don't have to shut the government down, and i certainly hope that's true. but i do not believe that we need any tax and spend compromise, and i will not support that, and i don't think the american people will support it either. they know we spend too much. they know we have ramped up spending $800 billion for the stimulus package, discretionary spending has gone up 24% in two years, and they know we can reduce federal spending without this country sinking into the ocean. that's what they expect us to do. that's what governors are doing, mayors are doing, county commissioners are doing, all

over my state, all over america. we have got to recognize that washington is spending too much, not taxing too little. how can we ask americans to pay more in taxes when washington is not even willing to cut cut $61 billion from our bloated bureaucracy? if i have a proposition from our colleagues who wish to raise taxes before we consider asking the american people to pay another cent in taxes, why don't we first drain every cent of waste from the federal bureaucracy? we will never truly dig ourselves out of this crisis and put this nation on a real path to prosperity unless we bring our spending under control. america's strength is not measured by the size of our government, but the scope of our freedoms and the vigor and vitality of the american people

and their willingness to invest and work hard for the future. that's what makes us strong. endless spending, taxing and borrowing is a certain path to decline, and we're on that path today and we must get off it. so we know the threat, we know what we need to do. the economy is trying to rebound. so let's take some good steps today. let's pass this61 billion reduction in spending this fiscal year. it will amount to about about $860 billion over ten years. it will be a very significant first step. that's what's before us today. not the other isss. we have got to decide what we are going to do about funding the governmentetween now and september 30. that's the rest of this fiscal year. let's take a fir step on that. let's begin to look at what we are going to do for next year's

budgets and what we're going to do about our surging entitlement programs that are on an unsustainable course. we can do all those things and leave our country healthy and vigorous and prosperous for the future. i truly believe that that's the kind of thing that we need to be doing now. so i am really baffled that we don't know why that the president is not leading more, he's not talking directly to the american people about why this is important. is it just a political squabble with the president sitting here and going to rio and talking about libya, or is it true, as mr. bernanke says, we -- we are on an unsustainable path? or is it true that mr. erskine

bowles, the president's own director of the fiscal commission, says that we are facing the most predictable economic crisis in this country's history, and said it could happen within two years? are we making this up? the american people get it. they tell me what's going on in washington? you've got to get your hse in order. that's what this past election was about. people understand we need some action and some leadership here, but we're not getting it. i just truly believe if we could get together, if we could get a bipartisan effort to look at this $61 billion, we could disagree on how to reduce that spending. maybe republicans have this idea and democrats have that. let's work all that out, but

let's reach an agreement that actually reduces spending by enough to make a difference, that the world would say wow, the congress is beginning to take some steps. thatas a nice, good, strong first step. now if they will stay on that path, may the united states will get on the road to prosperity again and stay out of this dangerous debt crisis area that we're in today and get on the right path to prosperity. this country's ready to grow. it's ready to rebound. it just needs a clear sigl from washington, in my opinion. american leaders, those of us in this congress, have no higher duty, no greater moral responsibility than to take all appropriate steps to protect the good people we serve from the clear and present danr we face. it's time to get busy about it, madam president.

i believe that if we act strongly and with clarity, the american people not only will support it but they will be happy with it and it will make a positive difference for our country, and i would thank the president and would yield the floor and note the absence of >> it has been 38 days since the house passed hr-1, our plan ending september 30. in the 38 days, the senate has failed to act on any plan that would fund it the center

september 30. they have created this mess because they failed to do a budget, and it is time for the senate to move the bill so we can sit down and began negotiations. we are not going to negotiate with ourselves. today, the democrats got their marching orders about how to try to depict us. we have done our work. instead of them issuing marching orders, maybe what they should do is get to work and actually pass a plan. listen, our point in this is to reduce spending will lead to a better environment for business folks around the country to create jobs. i used to run a small business. i understand the uncertainty that surrounds this out of control spending and the debt that we have. all of the other activities coming out of this administration, the uncertainty that has people sitting on their

hands. they're not going to get new equipment, new employees, and a new plants unless they see a clear picture of fiscal sanity in washington. we have a real opportunity to help people around the country and investors in our country by helping to end some of the uncertainty. we have got a situation where this federal government continues to borrow nearly 40 cents of every $1 it spends. that does not make sense to the american people, and we know it is honest -- it is unsustainable. the american people do not a understand why it seems that harry reid and chuck schumer and the rescue it is important to defend every dollar and cent of federal spending. a look at spending has something that is just a first step in terms of trying to address a deficit that has grown to $1.6

trillion. today it seems we did find out that chuck schumer is playing political games. when he decides to tell his caucus to pick republicans in the house as not serious and to depict every spending cut as non sensible, that is the thing that is not serious. i think we have now seen that the american people have that harry reid and chuck schumer decided that they are not going to be for cutting spending. if that is the case, and there is only one other alternative. they have to lay out a plan as how they are going to sustain this deficit and debt. you either cut spending or raise taxes. where is harry reid's plan to raise taxes? how are they going to deal with increased costs or higher taxes? >> just coming back from a week listening to small businesses and having round tables about

making jobs get creative. you saw a joint economic study before we left that studied these countries for more than 40 years. they are able to grow in the private sector. we watch a new congress to be very open about a debate to cut spending. it is a very open process. the senate with 38 days. the senate has produced nothing. now i even wonder who is leading the senate. we had a defect a leader in schumer who thinks he wants to engineer a political game as many reporters could actually hear on a call. he is spending more time in politics than what he is spending on policy. he is taking politics before people. that is not what the american people expect. they expect an open debate to see where everyone stands. where everyone can have a vote.

all americans know when they go to negotiate whether to buy a car or anything else, somebody makes an offer and somebody comes back with another offer. the senate cannot decide who their leader is. >> well it is obviously extremely revealing that senate democrats have instructed their members to use extreme language. what i think is extreme is to have no plan. no plan to deal with the continuing unemployment. no plan to deal with the fact that as a nation we are borrowing almost 40 cents on the dollar, most of it from the chinese and sending the bill to our children and grandchildren. the route this constituent work. , all over the fifth district of texas that i represent, what i heard was is, congressman, i am concerned about the debt. i know ultimately i have to pay

for it. so it is time to put this nation on a spending trajectory that makes sense so we can cut jobs. rejects -- so we can create jobs. we need for them to pass a plan and get on with the nation's business. >> a spokesperson for harry reid said they had made an offer for you, that is right around the number of $33 billion initially proposed. what is wrong with that $30 billion? >> there are a lot of numbers that have been discussed and thrown a rock. the fact is there are not an agreement -- there is not an agreement on the number. did is just not cutting

spending. there is a number of limitations that passed the house. every bill that has passed to the numbers of years i have been here has included limitations. i think some of my questions were answered by the president. i think others were not. the fact that the plan appears to be a humanitarian mission to stop the slaughter of innocent people in libya, certain something i think most of the congress would support. the second part of this plan is that we hope that off the leaves. -- did off the leaves. i just cannot think that is a strategy. when you have listen to what is

going on and all of the words, it really is nothing but hope. so if gadaffi does not leave, how long will they still be there to support a no-fly zone? that is a very troubling question. >> [unintelligible] >> i am not going to put any options on the table or put any off the table. our goal is to cut spending because it will only lead to a better environment for job creators in america. that is our goal. we are going to continue to pursue our goals. thank you you all.

>> and a few moments, a hearing on the silver rights for american muslims and other communities. british foreign secretary hague and hillary clinton talk about the international response to the situation in libya. after that, a debate on the proposal helped -- designed to help home owners behind on their payments. on washington journal tomorrow morning, we talk about energy policy energygene green, on the

environment and the economy. the president and ceo, steve forbes, will take your questions. and we will take a look at what nato countries can offer with stephen flanagan. "washington journal"live on c- span, every day. >> follow c-span on twitter. is the fastest way to get updates as well as links to the events we have covered. 20 viewers who already follow art twitter feed. get started at twitter.comscspan. >> thomas perez testified before

a subcommittee today with the formal civil rights official from the george bush. this is two hours. >> today is the first hearing of this subcommittee with the human rights subcommittee, which i chaired for the last four years. i want to thank him for giving me the chance to chair this. i look forward to working with and the gramm, my friend and colleague, and other members of the subcommittee who would join us. i will recognize senator leahy and gramm. i think is appropriate to hold

this on what is called the constitution does the first freedom, a freedom of religion. many of our founders fled religious persecution and played great importance on religious freedom. he summed up the prevailing view in "and this light of liberty, it is the boast that aslant's the list and that's what forfeit the protections of the law. despite the best intentions to our history, many religious minorities have faced and tolerance. the lynching of leo frank in 1950 is one infamous example. and anti-semitism continues to be significant in america. often prejudiced has been directed at religions of recent immigrants. in the last century, it was catholics from places like ireland, italy, my mother's country of origin whose loyalties were questioned. i brought to this hearing a family treasure. 100 years ago in 1911, my

grandmother landed in baltimore, maryland, she brought with us -- she brought with her mother, two years old, and my aunt and uncle. the came down off a boat in baltimore and somehow found their way to my grandfather in st. louis, illinois. i have no idea how they made that journey without speaking english. there is no physical evidence left of that journey but this book. this is a catholic prayer book, printed in 1863 which at the time of their emigration was contraband. it was ordered that all per but had to be written in russian. my grandmother knew if she brought a superb book to america, she would have freedom to use it. i remember it and that is why this is -- the freedom of religion and so much to my

grandmother who was no constitutional scholar, she knew that america guaranteed that hearing and -- freedom and that's what this hearing is all about. today american muslims from the middle east and south asia are facing discrimination. the attorney general put it well when he said that anti muslim bigotry is the civil-rights issue of our time. this backlash began after the 911 terrorist attacks. in fear and anger, some americans wrongly struck out at innocent muslims, some asians. since 9/11, we have worked to combat terrorism. we continue to solicit and receive the support of many muslim americans who love this nation and to work with our government to protect it. at the same time, many of law abiding muslim americans face discrimination and charges that they are not real american simply because of their religion. this debate will continue, but terrorism is not the subject of today's hearing. we should all agree it is wrong

to blame an entire community for the blame of if you. it is not the american way. american muslims are entitled to the same constitutional protections as every other amer. >> congress also spoke with a clear voice. i co-sponsored a resolution the was then the only american in the senate who condemned the bigotry and said that american muslims are vibrant, peaceful, law-abiding and greatly contributed to american society. a resolution passed both chambers of congress unanimously. today president obama continues to speak out as forcefully as president bush. even though president obama is

often challenged by a chorus of harsh voices, a leading member congress did believe that there are too many mosques in this country. america is experiencing islamist political offensive designed to and undermine our civilization. even the prominent religious leaders said islam is "we get an evil." have even question the premise of to date goes the hearing, that was to protect the civil rights of american muslims. such inflammatory speech from public figures crete's if fertile environment for discrimination. it is not surprising " -- after the southern poverty law center that tracks hate groups designated five entire muslim a good for the first time. we have seen and to muslim a crimes, bowling in schools, restrictions on moscow's direction, and grand earnings.

sadly this is a nationwide phenomenon. including my home state of illinois. to take one example, a man was recently sentenced to 15 months in prison for blowing up the van of a palestinian family was parked in front in burbank, illinois. it is our government's responsibility to punish this kind of discrimination. it is incumbent on all americans who love this nation and the bodies are constitution protects to make it clear to defend the civil rights of our muslim neighbors, make it clear that defending the civil rights of our muslim neighbors are important as the rights of christians, jews, and nonbelievers. of course, the first amendment protect not just the freedom of exercise of religion, but freedom of speech. all of us, and specially in the most public life, has a responsibility to choose our words carefully. we must condemn and the muslim bigotry, and make it clear we will not tolerate religious

discrimination in our communities. because protect our nation and protect the fundamental freedoms of our bill of rights. i would like to acknowledge the senator who is here. ok. senator gramm, if he will proceed. >> thank you, this is a hearing that we need to have. these are difficult issues. what does it mean to practice religion in america? it means that i have to stand up for your right to pursue your religion because if i do not stand up for your right, you will not stand up for mine. part of freedom of religion and speech is that we can disagree. people can say, the one thing i learned about freedom of speech, you can go to a funeral of an american servicemen and say awful things in the name of freedom of speech. i know i do not agree with the decision, we are going to have to understand that religions are formed because people have

different views. it is o.k. you can argue, there are just like you cannot cross. we are living in a rule of law society. i stand by senator or anyone else who wants to send a message, you can have your disagreements. there are thousands of american muslims serving in our military. to anyone who will wear the uniform and to protect america, god bless you. that is the unique thing about america. we are able to attract a wide group of people with different views to fight for a common cause. i do understand were you are coming from. there are several issues to be dealt with. can we do two things at once? can stand up for the rights of muslim americans? i think the answer is unequivocally, yes, we must. if anyone suffer, we all suffer. we are going to have to come to grips with things going on in the world. there are things being said that are disturbing.

their efforts to radicalized young muslims in america that have to be dealt with. i can show you the statistics. what is going on with europe, the idea that we can get ahead of an enemy that once to come to our shores and radicalize people in our country is part of this war. we are at war. what is going on in scotland, -- europe, i'm sorry, you have doctors that attacked an airport. you have young men raised in london and blow up, why should we be and you do that? i will stand with the to practice her face and be an integral part of this country, you are what you have to help your country probably uniquely compare to anyone else understand what is going on and fight back. the front lines of this war are in our backyard and the neighborhoods. so to the american muslim community, i will stand with you as you practice your religion and exercise a right under the constitution, but i am asking you to get in as a community and

let it be known to your young people that there are lines that you will not cross and this radical message that is being passed by people who will kill every gentile alike that we are all in this together. i have been too high rack and afghanistan to know -- i have been to iraq and afghanistan enough to know. we are all in this one together. we are all in america together. we are all going to stand up together and to the senator, i will try to do my part as a republican to let my party anybody listening know that i totally get it when it comes to freedom of religion and the ability to practice different faiths. i'd like everybody in the country to know, including muslim americans, the agenda

being said by people trying to radicalized young muslims here in america and throughout the world, it is just as bad for the muslim american community as it is for anyone else. maybe the worst offender of all is somebody who practices the paid to reject their ideology. people in the middle east who are trying to separate themselves from this radical minority moslems need our help. that is why we need to help those people in libya who are trying to replace gaddafi, we need to stand by these people in egypt to are trying to charter a different hat. you will never convince me that young people who went into the square want to replace mubarak with the moslem brotherhood or allocated. we live in very complicated times vary it is always helpful to keep it simple. the simple thing for america is to understand if we cannot accept differences among faith,

maybe yours is next. the simple thing for every american to understand is that we are at war with an ideology that has no air force to shoot down, no need to sync. we are going to have to work hard and together to win. muslim american community, get into this fight and protect your young people from radicalization. >> thank you, senator graham. >> thank you. this is the first hearing that you and graham are going to have with your subcommittee. with the that the fbi director testified before this committee in the past years, there has been a dramatic increase in domestic hate groups. some of these activities result in targeting the american muslim community. to make matters worse, some leaders as senator byrd and

pointed out have sought divisiveness against american muslims. to fan the flames of hate against those with different traditions runs contrary to our american dog use. our nation was founded in large part on the importance of religion -- religious freedom. i welcome the renewed focus by some in our charter, the constitution of the united states. i remind everybody that the constitution is not a menu with options to choose based on the political winds of the moment. instead it is a constitution that sets forth freedoms and protections for all of us. the first amendment and are millerites preserves all of our other rice. guaranteeing a free press, and the free exercise of religion. it ensures an informed

electorate the freedom to worship god as we choose or not to, our choice. it guarantees diversity. you guarantee diversity and protect the idea of diversity, you guarantee democracy. throughout the history of the world, religious minorities have been persecuted. members have been systematically denied freedom and categorically and even stern -- terminated. all americans deserve civil- rights protections provided in the constitution. it does not end in the first amendment. it continues to ensure due process and equal protection, bolstered by an important civil- rights laws that we have passed to guarantee there not be discrimination against religion. members of the committee worked with the late senator ted

kennedy and myself over the past several decades to ensure this freedom of religion. we were to pass the freedom of religion act, it has abandoned a bipartisan issue in the senate. but more importantly than being a bipartisan issue, religious freedom it has been a consistent american and now you. that is what really counts the most. american muslims all americans must be protected by the rule of law that holds these protections. we passed the math the shepherd hate crimes act to -- matthew sheppard hate crimes act.

last year in the run-up to the national elections, the rhetoric became even more heated. there were threats of karan burnings, some have even asserted that muslim americans are not entitled to the protections of the first amendment. that comment should shock and appall anyone who claims to love the constitution. somehow one of the oldest colleges on earth is not a religion at all, so there follow or should not have protections of the first amendment. that is nonsense. i hope americans will remember why the founding fathers traded the first amendment when they hear this divisive rhetoric. former assistant general, for

the hearing. he testifies to remind us that capital-letter ultimately have our loyalty to america question. this is in the early stages of our lifetimes. he returned to the irish and the italians, my irish ancestors when it came to vermont not one of the most tolerance its of america, my father was a teenager he faced signs that said no irish need apply or "no catholics need apply." by italian grandparents in a small town were seen as different. my mother, spoke a strange language.

when they had a mass, the priest would have to come in through the back door in the current would have to be drawn. the shade would have to be drawn. that would be inconceivable today. members of the senate of other faiths ultimate look to their own experience. religious bigotry can be easy to ignite, very difficult to extinguish. i agree that religious -- a terrible mess use of religion to incite violence. divisive religious rhetoric, it demeans the principles upon which this great nation was founded. i think you. >> thank you, chairman leahy,. i appreciate that congress -- comment.

i have told him he is where the gaelic meets the garlic. [laughter] we have a returning member here. he was a great number of the subcommittee for many years and has now gone on to other things, i will not say better think about other things. he has asked for an opportunity to participate in this hearing. >> well, senator graham, thank you for allowing me to participate in this hearing. the right to freely profess and practice faith or not practice it is a fundamental right in our country. for more than 200 years, our first amendment says that " congress on make no laws establishing a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" denise to be the envy of people around the world. even before the first amendment was ratified, the constitution

contended very important misprision in article 6, section 3, all federal and state officials to swear an oath or affirmation to support the constitution and says that no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office of public trust under the united states. in my own state of maryland, only christians could have open participation in public life into the maryland general assembly enacted in 1825 to pass the so-called yield. i think my ancestors would be proud to see me elected to the maryland house of delegates, and now the united states senate. among other reasons, my grandparents also can to this country in search of greater religious freedom and tolerance. notwithstanding the protections of our constitution and laws, i am very concerned we are witnessing the demonization of a particular religion. over the last decade, muslim americans have been the target of a growing wave of anti muslim bigotry. it is our obligation to talk

about this growing problem and what steps the government can take courses -- to reverse this trend to protect the civil rights of all muslim americans. we took an important step forward to protect the rights, and that was the enactment of the matthew sheppart hate crimes prevention act of 2009. this legislation gives the justice apartment to petition for a grant to run the country and strengths the doj to look for a grant. the justice department has stepped up its enforcement to combat hate crimes and discrimination against muslim americans. i applaud his actions. i know our first witness has been a real leader in that regard. in 1975, the united states and europe established a cooperation, now known.

the unitas congress pretty commission to monitor the compliance with these commitments. i in the senate chair of the commission, i have raised religious human rights issues in other countries such as france when in the name of national security, the parliament or wearing a mother religious. but the swiss mr. to building a mosque. these policies -- policies restricted the practice of muslims but also christians and jews. i've also raced chris -- religious issues in the united states. the united states is the signature of the 1975 act, has accepted commitments to religious minorities. in the context, the united states of pledged to promote each or respect, understanding, cooperation, and solidarity, among all people living in its territory without distinction of its ethnic origin or religion, and will encourage a solution of

problems the dialogue. the united states has played a leadership role including parliamentary assembly to focus on aspects of intolerance and discrimination including against muslims. it has been at the forefront of many initiatives, during the 111th congress, i chaired a hearing on which we heard press special representative to monitor and report on discrimination. among those testifying, the personal representative on combating an intolerance and discrimination against muslims. the senate is taking another important step in complying with our commitments by holding this hearing. we need to encourage the muslim community in the united states to engage with them. i applaud the german for holding this hearing. we cannot allow individuals or groups and as the religious police, this only because our

beliefs and freedoms. s all our constitution to safeguard the rights for them to freely practice their religion. we need to stand up against intolerance and the justice. s and together as a nation and move forward and more constructive and helpful manner. >> thank you. it is clear to have you back on this panel, cardin. >> thank you for holding a hearing or you can encourage him to come back in here -- speak with us. this hearing reaffirms the need for all americans to respect each other's fate. i think it can all agree. if it is part of a narrative that this is improper to point out the obvious, that too many young muslims are being radicalized to join a jihad and everybody should stand against

that, count me out. the only way to stop terrorists is to understand where they are coming from. political correctness cannot stand in the way of identifying those who would do us harm. nor can we ignore the first amendment protections. i am at a bit perplexed by the focus of to date was the hearing. if we are concerned about the most egregious religious hate crimes, i am wondering what we are not talking about the crimes against jews and christians according to the last year for which statistics are available from the department of justice regarding hank crimes based on religious bias, 71.9% or victims because of offenders into this by is. almost 72%. 8.4% because of anti islamic bias. so i wonder where our priorities are. how about their persecution and some muslim countries today? how about the persecution of some in the muslim communities

who were former muslims who converted to another trader north it at all. the point is that all bigotry is to be condemned. we are only credible if we are -- selective condemnation is not helpful. >> thank you. i would like to ask consent to enter into the record the 2 page list of hearings that have been held in both the house and senate relating to discrimination against specific religious groups including jews and christians and note that this is the first hearing relating to any discrimination against that religion. i think it is obvious that weep condemn all religious bigotry. >> i'd like to thank you you senator durban and graham were conducting this hearing by

conducting this hearing which i understand is by no means intended to exhaust the subject going to the point that senator kyl very appropriately makes. i think that it really is designed to raise awareness and show our own commitment to fighting bigotry, hatred, prejudice, intolerance, wherever it may exist. the united states right now is involved in a war against terror. in this very building two floors below us, there is an ongoing hearing that springs from the war against terror. in that hearing, there is discussion about the service and sacrifice made by men and women wearing the uniform in places around the globe that began nearly pronounced. they are there to defend the dose values of freedom and democracy that really we

celebrate today by having this hearing and recognizing the threats to our own freedom and democracy when we fail to defend it here at home. as intolerable, as and justice and in talks are in this country, as dangerous as and tolerance and injustice is what we are in different to hatred and bigotry against anyone based on religion or the content of what people say, i believe we are here today so that we can help protect those thought use that are threatened by terrorists abroad. we can make sure that every individual is protected in his or her exercise of religion and speech. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> thank you. perez is in the justice department. would you please stand at first and raise your right hand. do you are from the the testimony you are about to give before this committee is the truth, the whole truth. let the record reflect that the witness has answered in the affirmative. mr. peretz, thank you for being here. please proceed with their opening statement, it will have some balance statements. >> my name is tom perez, it is an honor to be back in front of this committee. i know my former boss is here in spirit today. it is a real honor to talk about this critical issue among others. within hours of the 911 terrorist attacks, a muslim americans, arab-americans, and south asian americans nationwide

were confronted with a powerful backlash. there was a search of violence targeting these groups including threats, assault, arson, murder, two days after the attacks, and individual unpatented to set fire to cars in a mosque in seattle. on the same day, and individual set fire to a pakistani restaurant in utah. the first person killed in post 911 violence, he was a seik, pumping gas at his gas station in 9/11. in the months following the attacks, more than 300 federal investigations were initiated. there was also an increase in other instances of discrimination. on the afternoon of 911, a hotel in iowa cancel the reservation of an arab american groups made to host a convention. the federal government under president bush's government responded forcefully.

they traded a task force to make -- targeting grants. over the last two years, we have worked to build upon that foundation, and expand our efforts to engage in the community to ensure that we are puddling our responsibility to protect their civil rights. when of my predecessors who was here today, he was the leader in the response to the backlash incidents. he established a new position of special counsel for religious discrimination. one of my most trusted members of my staff on these issues a long, we have continued to post a regular interagency hearings with representatives of the arab-americans, south asian organizations. we can learn more and do the best job possible. we have also made a priority to

expand our operations. in my travels across the country, i have met with leaders from the various committees, not just in dearbourne or l.a. or chicago, i have met moslem leaders in new haven, run-up, tennessee, and elsewhere. the loss not to just learn about civil-rights violations where they are occurring, but also to build bridges to the community to build trust and understanding. regrettably, almost a decade has passed since 9/11, we continue to see a steady stream of violence and discrimination against muslims. in each city and town were i have met city leaders, i have been struck by the sense of fear that and it's their life. fear of violence, bigotry, hey, discrimination, this intolerance manifests itself in many different ways. last month we subdued eight police charged with post until a

backlash miles. after three men were mind -- in my out -- i hear complaints that children face harassment in schools, that they are called terrorists and told to go home even though this is their home. america is indeed what they were born. we have a regrettably robust pocket of cases in the school systems involving harassment of muslims. in fact, these kinds of cases are the largest categories of religious discrimination cases that are education system handles. we continue to follow the leadership in republican and democratic administrations, but carter and sen leadership to combat discrimination in the workplace. we have a number of cases of discrimination at work. with the doj report and a 150% increase of discrimination against muslim americans says that 11.

on behalf of two americans who were harassed by management called unspeakable words, terrorists, camel jockey, and other names. we continue the tradition of pursuing accommodation cases. we released recently filed a case on behalf of a teacher in illinois he was forbidden to take a case for a pilgrimage, a requirement of her fate. this case is very similar to the one filed by the eoc in the bush administration against a tennessee hospital refused to grant a muslim medical technician a three week leave of absence for the pilgrimage. no person should have to choose between their faith and their work. republican and democratic administrations alike have worked hard for this. we continue to work hard to enforce it, which celebrated the

tenure anniversary of the -- 14 have been opened to the last 10 months. last year we filed a brief on the state case involving a proposed mosque -- the construction of a community center that included a mosque. there were neighbors to challenge that and argued that islam is not a religion and it there for the county was wrong to treat the mosque in the same way it would treat the church. our group argued one thing. religion is a vote -- is almost a religion. we filed the brief, the court dismissed the case. these issues are and will continue to be non-partisan. i applaud again as they mention the efforts of my friends on religious freedom. our efforts are in the as you have noted a reflection of our values in society. as a nation, we believe strongly an unequivocal clique and religious freedom.

this belief is embodied in the laws that we enforce. the headwinds of intolerance that so many of the committees we are here to discuss today are facing as you have pointed out are no different than the bigotry confronted by groups throughout our nation's history. the good news is that with each wave of intolerance, our nation has indeed responded passing the civil-rights laws, striking down all laws that section discrimination, and eventually recognizing the value of a diverse community and embracing those previously shunned. today we are simply using the longstanding tools in our arsenal to address any emerging challenge that threatens the freedom of individuals who want nothing more than for their families to be accepted in the communities, to live their lives, practice their faith, and realize the american dream. we will continue to use every available tool in our law enforcement arsenal to transform this had been up and tolerance into a tail wind of inclusion and opportunity. thank you for the opportunity to

participate. i look forward to answering any questions that you may have. >> thank you mr. perez. it's been the chairman of the homeland committees criticize this hearing. he said "it reinforces the false premise that muslims having their civil rights violated." your testimony reflects the reality of discrimination facing muslim americans today. i would like to look at the justice department's own statistics. muslims comprise less than 1% of the american population. 14% of the justice department's discrimination involved muslims. according to your testimony, over 50% of the justice cases have been open since may 2010. he testified that reflected an increase in anti muslim sentiment, can you elaborate? >> i have had the privilege in this job a traveling to half of

the u.s. attorney's offices across the country. as part of our visits to make sure that we are aggressively enforcing civil rights laws and listening, we are listening and learning as i did in chicago from. sticklers north dakota muslim sheik is on committee. it really tears my heart out to listen to this story. i will never forget a trip to tennessee where and iman talks about how his son does not want to go to school because he is so scared every day. they were telling him, go home, you terrorist. this is his own. we see this across the country. we see this in a wide array of areas, employment, religious zoning context, school context. >> according to data from the equal opportunity employment commission, muslims of 0.45% of religious discrimination cases.

those i mentioned earlier comprise less than 1% of the population. "there is a level of hatred and animosity that is shocking. i have been doing this for 31 years, i have never seen such an to pass the toward workers." among other things, the suit said that managers, supervisors, and other employees regularly throw blood, me, bonds at the somali and muslim employees. i would ask in the am plum and discrimination, this notion that was expounded by someone in the other body of lack of evidence and discrimination against muslims, have you found in employment discrimination similar cases? >> we have. these cases did not start simply in 2009.

these cases -- i went to applaud the bush administration for aggressively pursuing these cases in the post -11 universe. 150% increase posted 911 is rather eye-popping figure. >> can i ask you -- i but to give everybody a chance. there are quite a few members here today, which i am honored that is the case. in the testimony, if so will -- she argues that the current decentralized system is confusing for victims who want to contact the civil-rights division. she also notes that the lack of a centralized hot line? it difficult to track and collect data on civil-rights complaints like a breakdown of complaints by race and national origin and religion. for example, we do not know how many american jews, muslims have filed complaints with the civil

rights division and how many have led to prosecution. what is your reaction to this suggestion? do we currently have a system for tracking compliance by race, national origin, and religion? >> yes. we have had this discussion. i appreciate the suggestion of a couple of months ago. we actually now have a 800 number for expressing these issues. the number is not the only porter, and i want to make sure that people could file complaints and whatever mechanism was most comfortable. if you are working or leaving -- living in phoenix, you may have a relationship with your local u.s. attorney's office. the collaboration and coordination that we have done with u.s. attorney's office is to make sure that we are speaking with one voice is a critical important part of our efforts to make sure that we are tracking. as it relates to your question about data collection, as you

know i hate crime statistics, reporting is voluntary. there are many communities where there is no reporting at all. while those statistics under the hate crimes statistics act are useful, i think everyone agrees that they understate the amount of violence that we are seeing across the country because of the voluntary nature of the reporting. that is the law, and as a result of that, those are the weaknesses in that data. >> i hate to preempt her testimony by bringing up another point she is quick to raise, to chart here i am looking for a reaction. she noted that under title 6 of the civil-rights act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination by federal funded, in this -- so discriminating against a person of the jewish faith, muslim,

sheik, a student perhaps, because of their religion is not prohibited under title 6. what is your opinion of the loophole in lot? >> we have a number of tools to attack religious discrimination. we have title ii, which is in the civil rights act, which has up public accommodations reference. we have tools there. total seven is obviously employment. the equal credit opportunity act gives us that opportunity there as well as the fair housing act. in addition, under title 6, although total six does not have the word "religion" in it, discrimination against jews,

arabs, and seeks, and others of religious groups can use the statute if there is actual perceived shared ancestry and characteristics rather than religious practice. >> why would we not want to clarify that? why are we stopping short of making it clear? do you see a policy reason why we should not? >> in certain circumstances, title 6 can apply in these situations. i am happy to have further conversation with you to explain how it can apply in these situations. >> senator gramm. >> thank you. i guess my opinion of such matters is that one cases too many. >> i agree. give me an example in america where somebody is being abused because of their faith, i think that everyone should push back.

that is my baseline year. i do not know what the numbers are. but one for me is to many. for those who have freedom of speech as a gift given to you by and allow people risking their own lives, when you say things here at home and you do things here at home that create tension based on religious inferences, particularly when it is the muslim community involved, you are putting our soldiers at risk. there are soldiers all over the world, a variety of religions, fighting in the name of america, try to help moderate muslims defeat radical islam. and my view is that there are plenty of moderate muslims other who need our help because it is harder to fight that war over there than it is here. at the end of the day, let's talk about the school case in

berkeley illinois. you gave some examples that almost every american in america would find offensive. there are plenty of muslims wearing are uniform and we need to understand that we're all in this together. as i am understand it, you had a math teacher who basically wanted to go for a three-week pilgrimage to produce a pate in harshaj. and she was the only math lab school instructor in that district and it was during the school year and the school district older she did not want to take three weeks off to finish off because -- because they needed her to takfinish

off the school year. common accommodations include permitting employees to wear religious headgear, arrange voluntary ships with co-workers on the sabbath. quite frankly, mr. peres, i think this is a stretch of the concept. can she go there on the summer? is there any requirement that she go during the three weeks that she chose in the middle of the school year? >> the losses that an employer has obligation to reasonably accommodate -- >> my question is that could the lady in question have met her obligations if she went there during the summer. i am no authority on the haj,

but is it only during these three weeks of the year that she could go? >> it is based on a lunar calendar. in this particular year, it was during this three-week period. >> that is not my question. if you are a christian andersen that i want to go to rome in the middle of a school year, -- if you are a christian and you want to go to rome in the middle of a school year, i would say no. my plane to is, it is my and standing that she could have met her religious obligation -- my understanding is that she could have met to religious obligation without being the only math lab instructor in the school district.

my question is simple. is this the only three weeks in her life and she can do this? >> i cannot get into the specific facts of this particular case. >> i know you may not be an expert on when you take a pilgrimage, but my point is i do not think so. i think she could have accommodated her religious beliefs without leaving the school district in a lurch. and it is nothing about her religion. i would say that about any religion. i think you are doing more harm than good on that front. the cases you described, i stand with you. you fight back. you push back. you bring these cases to court where people are being mistreated and abused. but my two cents' worth is that this is the wrong case to take. >> i know you want to make sure that the record is complete. this is strikingly similar to a

case brought by the bush administration in 2007 where an individual race -- individual requested a three week break to mecca. again, the employer -- >> welle they were wrong to -- >> and again -- >> i will agree with the bush administration and. there are a lot of people who are doing it lately. [laughter] so they were wrong, too. this is a good case study. i agree that the other cases you describe, all of us should stand up for someone who is being treated this way, a kid who cannot go to school, taunting, that is not american. but i think the obama administration has made a mistake. and it the bush administration believed this was right, i do not. is radicalization of muslim

americans on the rise? >> civil-rights experts. it is hard for me to say that. >> fair enough. here is with secretary napolitano said. "we have seen in increased number of risk with individuals -- home-based terrorism is here. let violent extremism abroad, it is part of the picture we must confront." she is absolutely right. i want to do two things. i want to stand by you to make sure that the muslim american committee has the right to practice their religion free of bigotry and hate. the first amendment to me, mr. chairman, means one thing. that is one subject not to be compromised. if we ever get into the fact that that is not true, then who's to say that your religion is not next. so i'm with you there. but i do understand the

concerns that a lot of americans have, that what is going on in europe is now coming to our shores. so i wish the obama administration would be more forceful in their approach to fighting homegrown terrorism. i think that is a weakness. not reading a terrorist suspect their miranda rights when they have been caught trying to blow up a van in times square is not productive. it is not helpful. so i wish the administration would look up the practice, and insisting that render rights be read to someone who tried to attack american hero on the homeland. we need to know what is coming next, and abused anyone, not torture anyone, but say you have a lawyer right after you tried to blow up a van or an airplane. i think obama needs to change some of his policies when it comes to fighting terrorism here at home. and i will stand with you when you try to push legitimate

cases of discrimination. but there are two sides of the story. and i want to talk about both, not just one. >> thank you. >> i will just note that the obama administration has come up with new directives on the use of murder and warnings, which would make very clear, if you have someone who looks like they have a bomb in times square, i have to stop because there is a need for miranda rights. i only mention that because sometimes we hear this tossed around by commentators who are miss stating -- misstating what is the role with the administration. i would like to hear your response to senator gramm's

question about the haj. i would be interested to see your response. i have no questions, mr. chairman. >> i am proud of the work we're doing in that case. >> thank you. senator kyl. >> good morning, sir. one of the cases that has been brought to our attention is the case of lipman of blood. it is one of the examples -- lipman abdullah. it is one of the examples of violating the rights of muslim americans. >> i assume that your office

has reviewed similar allegations on misconduct. can you characterize for the committee your overall impression of our law enforcement agencies'procedures and tactics in these situations? >> i reviewed the particular case and i reviewed to ensure that, in the course of carrying out duties, the there was not any violation of federal law. in this particular case, it would be the law that says that anyone who is acting -- who willfully deprives someone of the right of the constitution, this would be the right to be free from intentional use of excessive force. that is what we were examining. it focuses generally -- whether it is a federal law enforcement agency or a stator law enforcement agency. our focus is on whether there is evidence of an intentional deprivation to a constitutional right. in that particular case, after a very thorough review, we

concluded that the case did not present -- that the constitutional rights of the individual that you referenced were not violated. >> after a decade after 9/11, you have an assessment of the law enforcement procedures and tactics, as i said? >> in what context? >> as they relate to situations like this case. >> we reviewed a number of matters, not simply involving law enforcement. >> i am trying to get a jensen's of how we're doing. >> are we doing better? are we doing worse? >> we are working with our law enforcement colleagues to make sure we are doing the best possible job of enforcing the law and ensuring protections to the constitution. those are not mutually exclusive. i spent a lot of time in new

orleans, making sure we are building a blueprint for sustainable reform so we can reduce crime, in sure respect for the constitution, and enjoy public confidence in law enforcement. those are the real benchmarks. whether it is the federal or the state or the local law enforcement, those are the bridge marks for success in our policing. we certainly work with their colleagues and federal law enforcement. i personally participated in training for the border patrol academy on police integrity issues and civil rights issues and our colleagues in federal law enforcement across the board actively welcome their participation in that because we recognize that, again, we must succeed in reducing crime and respecting the constitution. >> i appreciate that. last friday, i attended a dinner

of american muslims who complained to me of being intimidated or threatened by other muslims because these folks believe in separation of mosque and state. and people who threatened and intimidated them, well, intimidated them because of those particular beliefs. i am sure that your office would be just as willing to investigate, where appropriate, and prosecute those kinds of cases in a situation where it is a non guess so -- a non- muslim who is doing the intimidating and threatening. >> yes. we will investigate. in the first prosecution under our new hate crimes law, we are aggressively buying that new

law -- aggressively applying that make a proper judgment of the application -- aggressively applying that new law and make a proper judgment of the application. >> i will get back to my constituent and say whether maybe communicate with the u.s. attorney in arizona, that is one of the ways that you said it could be done. >> i am happy to answer any questions you might have or that your constituent might have. >> thank you. >> senator woman called. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you mr. -- senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ez. thank you, mr. per

should the law be enhanced in this area to enhance federal tools? >> i feel that we have an ample number of tools right now. we are using them in a robust fashion. the biggest challenges to make sure you have the budget to carry out laws. i really appreciate the leadership of the president and the senate and the house in enabling us to get additional resources in the fiscal year 2010 budget. with those additional resources, that was the largest infusion of resources in our history. we were able to expand the work in this and other critical areas so that we could, again to the work. we do see this headwind of intolerance rearing its ugly head in the zoning context. we had a case in suburban

chicago, for instance. the education setting, that is one of the two or three frequently heard comment when i do average, about bullying in schools. if you are in a learning environment where you cannot learn for whatever reason and, in this particular case, because you are muslim or arabic or sihk or south asian and to go home but you cannot because this is your home, for me, my biggest wish list is to make sure we continue to have the resources to enforce these laws. >> your challenges primarily in the area of enforcement, not so much the substantive authority. >> we fear at the moment -- we have a large number of tools to do the work we need to do. we are always willing to -- >> let me ask you then.

would it not make sense to engage and involve states and local government in this effort? >> that is an excellent question. we have provided training to over 750 law enforcement agencies across the country on precisely these issues of muslim, sihk, south asian engagement. after the mets to shepherd john bird act, we engaged state and local law enforcement. law enforcement and civil rights enforcement is a joint venture between federal, state, and local law enforcement. >> i know that. do any, like connecticut, have laws that specifically prohibits -- >> correct. i had the privilege of spending a day in new haven a week ago.

we had a wonderful conference with the u.s. attorney and we had a lot of state and local officials there where we sent a very strong message to the residents of connecticut, that civil rights is the joint venture among federal, state, and local partners. so your point is very well taken. >> i was wondering if you have some guidance to take back to our states, to our enforcers at the state and local level as to how they can be more active partners in this effort. >> communication is key. we have set up a number of critical coalitions. i was in detroit recently, for instance, with the u.s. attorney. she had a very wide ranging coalition of community people, federal, local, state authorities to come together on

a monthly basis to discuss those issues. sometimes those meetings can be tense. but they build trust through that coalition. when you have a trust established, when an incident occurs that tests that trust, then you have that reservoir that you can build from. that coalition building has borne a lot of fruit for us and for the communities as well. >> is there a written protocol or procedure that you follow in determining whether the enforcement of a hate crime prosecution -- a criminal matter is obviously a situation of state law -- the issue frequently arises as to state,

federal choices of the jurisdiction and venue. >> i spent the better part of a decade as a career prosecutor, a federal prosecutor doing hate crimes. yes, we do have a protocol in the u.s. attorney manuel. the protocol we have followed and continue to follow is what is in the best interest of the case. i have personally been involved in a number of hate crimes cases where we worked them up and it was in the best interest of the case for the state to take it. ihk ofrder of a si 11 was aand after 9/u

state matter. in one particular case, the d.a. came to us and said we really wanted to take the case. he had just been elected. he was building his staff. we deputized one of his people as a special usa and that allowed us to secure the conviction of three defendants in that case. so there are u.s. attorney guidelines. but the most important guideline will always be what is in the best interest of the case. >> thank you very much. toto questions don't like ask -- staff research memo on the issue raised by senator gramm relative to the teacher asking for three weeks for a visit to mecca for the haj, it turns out that there are other cases that have been considered.

in one, it was about the employer's failure to accommodate an employee requested leave to attend an eight-day religious festival. i see that there has been other cases involving that particular christian religion in that 14- day leave that has been requested. i also find cases involving discrimination against those who have asked to be scared being scheduled on the sabbath. so there are cases involving jews, christians, and, in this case, muslims. is it correct that these cases are very suspect-specific with regard to evaluating the assessment of the employees religion and the hardship on the employer?

>> that is absolutely correct. it is important to note that it is the employer that has the burden of demonstrating and providing the reasonable accommodation or demonstrating the undue hardship. there is a long line of cases dating back literally decades. some were brought by the united states, either the eeoc or the doj. some are private cases. some are christian denominations, seventh-day adventist cases involving accommodation one day a week for people working the sabbath. so if you work in a particular work theand you do not seventh, you will work more saturdays and fried is then that person. so that was upheld in the jurisprudence. i am proud of the work we're doing in this case. it is part of a long line of cases brought by republican and

democratic cases. >> a number of states around the country are considering laws prohibiting the use of islamic religious law, such as sharia. we are all familiar with the way sharia is interpreted in iran and saudi arabia hardly a day goes by when there is not a report in the press of some of use of this sharia law by western standards. but for american muslims, sure it includes rules dealing with personal matters, like prayer, fasting, marriage, and inheritance. so there is a fear among some muslim americans that a strict ban on sharia would in fact inhibit their freedom of religion. an american muslim in oklahoma challenged the initiative on first amendment grounds, claiming that the law would

prohibit the will. is the civil rights division, which you represent, monitoring anti-sharia laws like the one in oklahoma to determine whether they violate the civil rights of muslim americans? >> i am aware of this conversation in other states. i heard of this in my visit to tennessee, for instance, were this issue was discussed and raised by one of the litigants in the local litigation where we filed our briefing. we will continue to review these lots to see if there is potential federal civil rights violations. -- again, i am aware of these cases. we have not filed a brief on the oklahoma matter or any other matter.

>> thank you. let's have the second panel, up. i want to thank everyone for being here. -- as have the second panel come up. i want to thank everyone for being here. ms. caro was counsel to the judiciary cemetery on the constitution. she worked with senator russ feingold when he chaired this very same subcommittee. she was an associate at the law firm of -- she received her ba from wellesley and heard jd from cornell law school.

our next witness is a dear friend, someone i respect so much, garden mall theater and a carrot, the archbishop america's of george washington. he is currently serving as a distinguished scholar at the library of congress. he served as archbishop of roman catholic archdiocese in washington 2001 to 2006. on february 21, 2001, seven weeks after his installation as archbishop, he was elevated to the college of cardinals by pope john paul ii. that may be a record. i do not know. you will have to check the vatican library. he served as chancellor of the catholic university of america in washington, d.c., president of the fourth trustees. he served as the fourth archbishop of new work appeared in 1981, pope john paul ii appointed him to be the first in new jersey.etuchen

he's earned a bachelor's degree and a master's degree from st. joseph's seminary in new york. he was ordained in the priesthood. he went on to get a second degree in social science. it is indeed an honor to have you with us today. i will feel a little bit nervous administering the oath to a cardinal. our next witness is are alexander acosta. previously, he was u.s. attorney for the seventh district of florida where, among other high- profile cases, he handled the prosecution's of abramoff for fraud come up the idea for terrorism, and james taylor jr. for torture. he served as assistant attorney general for the civil rights division where he led the justice department efforts to stem the post-9/11 backlash.

he worked at the law firm of kirkland and ellis. he received his b.a. from -- he was a clerk for justice toledo. -- justice alito. raise your right hand. do from the the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> idea. >> let the record reflect that all three witnesses answered in the affirmative. mr. cara, please proceed with your opening statement. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify on civil-rights of american muslims today. i want to especially thank you for your leadership in holding this hearing in bringing much- needed attention to rising anti- muslim bigotry. we have been hearing from

americans from all faiths and backgrounds and all walks of life who recognize that it has become a growing menace to the safety and the social fabric of our nation. it is especially heartening to seek bipartisan support on this issue. i was born and raised in painted toes, a small town in rural upstate new york. at the start of every school day, school told run across america, stood and recited the pledge of allegiance. the last line of the pledge said that we are one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. there is no qualifier. it is simply that we are one nation with liberty and justice for all. as the subcommittee knows well, our nation has unique long- cherished commitment to freedom, particularly low -- particularly religious freedom. lessons have been part of america for centuries, since the first slave -- muslims have been part of america for centuries,

since the first slave ships reached our shores. that is why the recent rhetoric demonizing islam and muslims, brutal attacks, harassments, and discrimination and even turning to kill americans, including children based on their fate is so vile. it is not we are as americans and it has no place in the schoolhouse, in the workplace, or in our communities. nearly 10 years after 9/11, hate crimes motivated by anti-muslim bias targeting these americans remain higher than levels prior to 9/11. a new york taxi driver was stabbed and nearly died after asked by passenger if he was a muslim. earlier this year, elderly men were gunned down while taking an

afternoon stroll in their neighborhood in northern california, killing one and critically injuring the other. employment discrimination complaints are at an all-time high. complaints comprise 25% of complaints received by the eeoc from 2008 to 2009. muslims comprise only 1% to 2% of the entire population. opposition to mosque construction is also on the rise and getting of wear. parents are more concerned than ever about their children. in one egregious case, a muslim high-school student in s.staten island was subject to various towns, punched in the groin, and spit on. taunts, punched in

the groin, and spit on. one beatty was so severe that his mother took him to the doctor. he had blood in his urine and suffered memory loss. this is one vial example of how bigotry is playing out across america today. parents worry -- will much of the next? and there were about the future. will america be hospitable to minority faiths? will it's better age prevail? or will the value of the freedom and respect be a relic of the past? bigotry has been simmering and growing since the tragic events of september 11. it was a terrorist attack that was an attack on all americans, muslims included. in the last several months, anti-muslim rhetoric has reached greater levels.

even political leaders have joined the fray, feeding hysteria. the vitriol has real life and death consequences. the message is clear. you are not welcome. words that were graffiti last inr on a sun for a maskemoscow tennessee -- for a mosque in tennessee. more are coming together to reject fear and divisiveness because they recognize that it is not american. as former secretary of state: powe collin powell said, "is the something wrong with being a muslim american?" the answer is no.

challenges remain and more must be done. i have outlined steps that congress should take and i ask that my full written testimony be entered for the record. thank you. >> thank you very much. i can tell that, as a former staffer, you knew you had five minutes. your written testimony will be made part of the record. >> allow me to thank you for the invitation and the of eternity to be with you to offer testimony today. as archbishop emeritus of washington, i am here representing the numbest its conference of catholic bishops. my written testimony places the treatment of american muslims in the broader context of religious liberty from the

perspective of our rich american tradition. as a community, it has been the target and we understand the need today to bring attention to protecting the civil rights of our muslim brothers and sisters. we see religious freedom as an essential foundation of our live together, in our own nation across the globe. all the time, we have made much progress together. but we fear the shared foundation is being weakened and undermined by religious prejudice, policies, and words and tactics that divide us. most appallingly, religious freedom is destroyed by a tax on people in some countries because of the terrible misuse of religion to incite hatred and even justify violence. the fundamental the trail of religious belief, attacking those of different religious perspectives in the name of religion can sometimes be used to promote suspicion and fear of

all people associated with the particular religious tradition. this kind of generalized villages prejudice is wrong and unjust and a clear violation of religious freedom. a justified concern for security and pursuit of those who revert religion to attack others cannot be allowed to turn into a new form of religious discrimination and intolerance. this is why we stand with their muslim brothers and sisters in defense of their dignity and rights, just as we will come and expect their reciprocity and solidarity with us and the rights of christians and other religious groups. religious values and commitments are assets to the common good, not sources of division or conflict. we know with particular sadness that muslim americans, with whom we have had a positive dialogue over decades, have had their loyalties and the least questioned publicly. this compels us to reach out in

solidarity and support of their dignity and rights as americans. we worry about the rhetoric and dialogue that -- their very loyalty as americans and traditions and values are being threatened. we remain firmly committed to the defense of religious for all, not just for catholics. our commitment is to the dignity of each and every human person. at the same time, we recognize that not every charge of wrongdoing against people or groups within the religious community oamounts to religious discrimination. at this particular moment in our nation's history, we're greece -- we face a real threat to our national-security from one type of terrorism that has its origins in a particular form of extremist ideology which holds itself out falsely as authentic islam. the legitimate concern for the

public order, however, must be pursued with effectiveness, skill, and respect for religious liberty. in particular, we need to avoid generalizing about any religion, especially about islam, based solely on the extreme use in conflict of a small group of radical extremists. the son founded generalizations and their efforts to fan the flames of fear are wrong and unjustified. they are hurtful when expressed by leaders in public life. this is a grave injustice against the vast majority of muslims in the united states who are loyal and productive members of our american society. the catholic bishops religious freedom has many expressions. our own history is a mega people and a religious minority has its immigrant people and a religious minority has its own story.

there are well-known contemporary examples where the state would force religious groups and individuals to choose between following their religious beliefs and practices and following the dictates of law. whereas the respect for religious freedom we ask, in compelling in religious entity to perform and act -- pruett -- to perform an act that violates its basic tenet. it is not merely the integrity of the principle of religious freedom, but also people who we serve an employe. in a universal church, we catholic bishops to the cry of people around the world who suffer persecution, violence, and discrimination simply because of their religious identity. in the last year alone, we have seen dramatic examples of the persecution of catholics and other christian communities around the globe. this march, a palestinian

minister, was assassinated at the hands of moslem extremists. for this courageous witness, he was brutally murdered. we appreciate the many sincere expressions of sympathy and competent -- and condemnation that have come from our religious partners in the muslim community, especially the islamic society of north america, the islamic circle of north america. they have stood with us as trusted allies in speaking out against violence and in defense of religious freedom. solidarity among people of every religion in the face of attacks of people of any religion is respect of freedom in action. as a religious community, are catholic faith is to defend freedom for all as a moral

priority and a human responsibility. it is an example to a world where too many doubt that people of religious -- of different religions can live together in peace and mutual respect. as other countries wrestle with how to treat religious minorities, let them look to our nation where we were to ensure our muslim sisters and brothers are treated with dignity and that their religious identity and believes must be treated with respect. thank you very much. >> thank you so much, cardinal. i will include statements from a wide variety of religious faiths that joining your sentiment in expressing solidarity with muslim americans. at this point, mr. acosta,

please proceed with your testimony. your written statement will be made part of the record. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to take a moment to thank you for holding this hearing. general perez made an important point that the protection of religious liberties is a bipartisan issue. muslim americans should take comfort in knowing that the effort to protect their religious liberties have been ongoing since 9/11. they have transcended the partisan divide. the title of today's hearing references american muslims and i thought it a perfect to begin by discussing two such individuals. the first is a student at the law school where i am now dean. he is one of our student leaders. he is a candidate for student body president. i asked him to send an e-mail

about himself. i was going to summarize it, but i will quote in full. "i am a muslim, born and raised in the united states. i suppose, by most people's standards, much of a was normal. i went to school, tried to get out of doing homework, and spent entirely too much time watching tv. the truth is i was pretty lazy. but that changed when i went to high school. i attended estero high school in is there, florida where i was introduced to the junior army officer training corps. it taught me how to be a leader and why it was important to take responsibility for my actions. i was the first to become a cadet officer and reached the highest rank of lieutenant colonel. but it is not my success there that i remember of high school. what i remember was the

confusion, the fear that overcame me on september 11 when the teacher turned on the question television just-in-time for me to watch the second plane crashed into the second tower of the world trade center. i knew that my country had been attacked. so i did when i knew was right. five months later, i listed in the military. i listed in the florida national guard and i transferred to regular active duty on july 27, 2003. in may 2007, i left active duty so i could go to law school. while the student's name is muhammed t -- he was expected as only one of five students to in turn. the second individual that i want to talk about is a young woman by the name of miss sharon hern.

her story begins in oklahoma. at the time, she told her sixth grade teacher that she was muslim and that she wore a head scarf as part of her religion. but the teacher did not object of the time. as she happily attended school for the next month, that changed on september 11, 2003 when her teacher asked her to remove her head scarf. the school permitted students to wear baseball caps, but wanted her to remove your heads up because it frightened other students. she was sent to the principal's office. the principal insisted that she removed her headscarf. which refused to do so, she was suspended. eventually, after court action, she was permitted to return to school wearing her head scarf. i speak about these two individuals because they

highlight some important principles, critical principles that make our nation great. the first principle is that, foremost, we are all americans. mr. aldesarni is an american. listen to his words. " i've understood that my country had been attacked. i enlisted five months later." school officials could have taken the opportunity to talk about america's early settlers and their search for freedom to express their faith. school officials could have taken this opportunity to teach basic civics, a topic which is sometimes lacking in our system of education. instead, these public school officials fed the fear to their

fellow sixth-graders that there should be afraid and that her faith should be surprised. in her case, and forcefully, there is an insult to our nature. -- in her case, unfortunate, there is an insight to our nature. president george w. bush understood this, when he visited the islamic center of washington to remind our resolution that those who could intimidate or take other angler should be ashamed. 10 years later, as we're approach the anniversary of 9/11, i feel obligated to reiterate the obvious. as a nation, we do not forget the events of a decade ago.

the desire to blame remains high. this is a good time, a critical time to temper our resolve with wisdom and to recall and remain true to our american ideals and freedoms, making sure that all people in this land are free to practice their faith without repression or reprisal. i look forward to your questions. >> i have been in the senate a long time. i cannot recall a panel so impressive. i want to raise an issue -- i want to address an issue raised by the cardinal. "where is the respect for religious freedom in compelling in religious and duty to act in ways that contradicts its most

basic moral principles?" this principle of thought to the question of sharia law. you heard the question i asked earlier about where the line should be drawn. we certainly know the excesses of sharia law. the killing of this man in pakistan who made controversy by saying he was opposed to the blasphemy laws, he gave his life for speaking out for tolerance. the same thing suggested the stoning of women for certain transgressions in muslim countries pared those, for many people, are the images of sharia law. but with the cardinal said in the context of sharia law and what we know to be excesses in some context to be muslim

practice to be peaceful in other contexts. >> as you pointed out, for everyday american muslims, what she really means it is the guidelines that guide our everyday lives. whether it is prayer, fasting, issues of marriage, in the way that religious law guides those everyday activities for christians and jews and other faith communities in the united states. the kinds of -- should i say excesses of sharia that you have outlined, i cannot imagine the circumstances under which they would be tolerated here in america in our legal system. there is a legal matter, the supremacy clause which ensures that the constitution is allowable and, no religious law,

no for law. and that is absolutely important. -- no foreign law. and that is absolutely important. i think these efforts to ban- area are woefully decided and they are chasing a threat that does not exist. but the implications, if they are actually allowed to be enacted, taking the oklahoma have seriousake consequences of religious practice for moslems here at home. >> i will as you to go a step further. in the oklahoma case, he said that it was sure real law that instructed him of how he would leave his property in his will. can you give me a other illustrations of sharia law in

the life and of -- life of an american muslim that you believe should be invested by most? >> the example that you gave is a good one. should someone decide to leave a will, decisions to get married under religious law in terms of how to go about their life, things like the prayer, how they brick, when they pray, fasting, which is also a cornerstone of the faith, those are just some of the examples. >> as well, i believe donations -- >> yes, charitable giving is an obligation for american muslims, as it is for many people of faith in this country. >> and the haj. >> yes. [laughter] that is something that is required.

>> i did not know the pillars of islam. >> mr. acosta, will you address that, this question of sharia law. >> i will try to do so. i will confess to not being familiar with the details of sharia law. i guess i have two thoughts. first, i would have concerns about equal protection issues while a legislature or state can certainly determine to what lost a state court will look. there are concerns when a particular type of law or a particular type of religion is singled out against others in much the same way that you cannot ban a headscarf but allow other head coverings. second, i would also note that, as a general rule, courts to not

apply for an laws or religious laws -- foreign laws or religious laws. when the contractor the will or the document dyfed he's in references another jurisdiction, it is the individuals who are signatories that are asking the court to look beyond the local jurisdiction and apply that other law. this is a fairly unusual circumstance that would come up. >> i do not want to miss state your position. initially, you said neutrality. >> yes. >> you would put whatever that religious belief is in the context of american law. >> absolutely. >> that is the way i see it, too. i do not understand the other point of view and i wanted to see if you could point to some difference that i do not see. i think we are in agreement with that. i want to ask you about a

delicate and can -- and controversial issue. you played a role with the controversy that rocked the nation for weeks related to the park 51, the proposed islamic center in lower manhattan. i understand that you were involved in an inner faith effort to stand in solidarity with american muslims who were experiencing religious discrimination. can you tell me how you got involved in this and describe that effort to the committee? >> actually, i was involved only tangentially because it was it was a new york question. we learned years ago to not get involved in other people's property because you have enough troubles on your own. it became such a national issue that people became very confused about it and the archbishop in new york spoke to it, as did others. i think it was because i am very

much involved with the muslim leadership here in this part of the country, especially with the islamic society of north america and its leadership. we have been trying to work together to look for peace in the holy land. so we have a very close relationship with the leadership of the muslim groups and with many of the jewish groups in our area. all of us are looking for the two-state solution. we have become friends over that over the years. it was the french ship which -- it was that friendship which wanted us to speak out more carefully. another difficult issue, an issue for you could understand the reasons behind both positions, but i think we felt that you could not say this wasn't an american thing. you could not say this was something that would destroy the

unity of our religious french and our religious working together. that was basically that we wanted to keep it above the level of saying that this is something you have to do -- you have to attack, you have to speak against. you could see that people of goodwill could look at both sides. butyou had to look at it that whatever you decided, you could not be condemned for, because there were good arguments on both sides. that is a position that is the first to take. we run into a world where everything is black and white. there are a lot of praise and our world -- grays in our world and it is important recognize that. >> the former assistant attorney general just passed a couple of questions about sharia.

it is one thing to say that it should not ban, but that it could supplant u.s. civil or criminal law. would that be a correct way to look at it? >> i do not see why any of foreign or religious law could or should supplant u.s. law? >> it is merely a guide by which people should live their lives from a religious point of view, it could not and should not allow things like underage marriage or polygamy or things of that sort? >> i think the supremacy clause makes clear that the u.s. what is the law the lan. >> cardinal mccarrick, the u.s. constitution and the teachings of your church of americans to practice in the faith of their choosing or no faith, is that correct? >> that is. jettied it would allow people to convert to a different

faith, would it not? >> yes, i am not happy about that. [laughter] but that is certainly part of our piscine rigid position in has been always. >> that is correct. for those who would condemn others and hateful language for doing that, well, that speech would be permitted but it would not be speech -- well, that speech would be permitted but would you condemn -- i'll ask it this way. would you condemn people who use hateful or insightful speech -- inciteful speech against people to convert? >> in general, you should love your neighbor. you have to have respect for your neighbor. you might tell your neighbors did you think that they are wrong. that they are sorry that they

are doing this, but to attack them as being anything less than your neighbor, it would not be a christian point of view. >> let me ask you a similar organization. you belong to an organization which has been clear about his positions on the website. had he made public announcement or statement condemning those colleges leaders call them -- who employed by letter or hateful rhetoric? >> by way of background -- >> you know that my time is very limited. three quick questions here. have you done that? >> my organization's work is focused on protecting and of holding our constitutional values. >> you have not condemned the hateful speech of those who

criticized others in the way that i mentioned, then? >> i guess i would have to know more specifically which particular case you're talking about. >> would you today criticized threats of death or physical harm directed at writer's work commentators who have criticized islamic extremism? you would contend that today, would you not? >> i think we have a very terrorist fidelity to the first amendment. >> i am not questioning whether people have the right to speak, the question is, whether you agree that that speech is helpful or hurtful and whether you would condemn it or be neutral about it? >> those who would threaten to kill somebody because of their political views, religious views, that is inappropriate. >> i am specifically talking about the website, i guess i should identify your site here,

which i will in just a moment. muslimadvocates.org. just last year, u.s. intelligence agency and our justice system uncovered and prosecuted a number of attempted terrorist attacks planned by radical muslim extremists. a compilation produce it by the investor did a project on terrorism based on recent justice the varmint reports listed just the following incidents. one was sent to ed to predict attempted to explode a car bomb. arrested for attempting to assist others who he believed to be members of al qaeda and planting multiple bombings in the metro area here in washington. october 19 -- said his 24 years

in prison for attempting to block a skyscraper in dallas tx. five were guilty of detonating -- attempting to detonate explosives near a synagogue. a conspiracy to attack john f. kennedy airport by exploding fuel tanks underneath the airport. on june 24, attempting to detonate a car bomb in times square. on march 18, guilty to charges in planning the november 2008 attacks in mumbai, india which killed 164 people. everyone of these incidents could resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people, and headley plot did, including six americans. all this terrorist were in different to whom they killed, including women and children. i think we owe a debt of gratitude to those who stop-loss

before they could be carried out. in view this history, i was curious about your web site, the community alert section, which is apparently directed to american muslims. it says the fbi is contacting american muslim to solicit information and advice about addressing violent to extremism. muslim advocates strongly urged urges people not to speak to law enforcement officials without the presence of a lawyer. i was stunned to do is to that kind of instruction to people who would read your side since of his legal abortion from muslim americans is one of the best was the law enforcement can uncover terrorist plots like the one i described. it seems to me that the specific obligation of all americans is to assist in preventing these heinous crimes, especially given the participation of muslims and all the attempted attacks that i mentioned. within the muslim americans would be feeling a special obligation to help but rick this out.

you think it is wrong to investigate, prosecute the individuals that i mentioned, and you stand by the muslim advocate community alert instructing them not to cooperate with the fbi and other law enforcement investigating potential as of terrorism, or at least not without a lawyer present? >> senator kyl, i fully understand that threats that we are facing. on september 11, i was working right here in the capital. i ran from the capitol with my colleagues because we thought planes were approaching. i fully understand that threats. those who engage in criminal acts must be stopped and brought to justice. and every american has a civic duty to report a criminal activity to law enforcement. i might add that attorney general holder has actually said that the cooperation of the american muslim community has been essential to detecting and forging terrorist plots. at the same time, every american

has the right to seek legal advice. that is a right guaranteed to every american, and i know you are a lawyer, we are both lawyers, we both know that our legal system is quite complex. encouraging community members to seek legal the fis as they interact with law enforcement is something that every american has a right to do. >> you stand by that statement on your website. >> i stand by all the statements on my website. >> thank you very much. >> a few weeks after 9/11, when i ran from the capital is you did that day, i flew into o'hare and as i went out to get a taxicab, there was a man wearing a turban in the cab. i got into the cab and sat in the back seat. as we started to pull away, i said to him, how of things been for you since 9/11? he said, i am sick.

i wear this turban everyday. some people give me the finger, some cursive me, someone might get into my cab. most just fine. i like to show them something. he reached over and pulled down the passenger side pfizer and there was a picture of a young man in a u.s. military army uniform. he said, this is my son. he is someone now oversees in the middle east and cannot even tell me, but he is fighting for my country. and my other son will enlist in the marine corps. people occurs at him, if they only knew that this man was putting his most to prized possessions and service to the united states, risking their lives to keep the station free, i cannot quarrel with anyone who argues that we have a threat of terrorism and have to deal with that honestly, and what i hope this hearing has suggested is that among the millions of muslim americans, the overwhelming majority are petri

audit, law-abiding people who simply want to live their lives as we all do in this great and free country. we have work to do. most americans and those were nine. the purpose of this hearing was to make it clear that there are some basic and fundamental principles that should guide us and our relationships with one another. your testimony today, for all three of you, it is an extraordinary. i like to close as i mentioned i would thanking you again, but also noting some of the groups that have submitted statements in support of this hearing. subcommittee has received statements from 43 different organization -- the aclu, interfaith alliance, as lummoxes cited north america, leadership conference on civil and human rights can military freedom society, south asian american leaders together, southern poverty law center, and the united methodist church. without objection, i will put the statements into the record.

one called shoulder with shoulder, of holding american values. among others, this coalition close the american baptist churches, usa, the disciples of christ, the episcopal church, evangelical little church, he reconstructionist rabbinical associations. here's part of what they said in their statement. we remain profoundly distressed and saddened by the incidents of violence consider it again -- commit against moslems across america by the desecration of islamic houses of worship, and by the destruction of sacred text. we stand by the principal that to attack any religion in the united states is to do violence to the american religious freedom of all. we encourage all to honor freedoms guaranteed by our constitution and unable to free at exercise of religion across our land. if there are no further comments, i am going to thank

the witnesses again and tell you that the hearing record will be open for two weeks, and additional materials and questions may be sent your way which i hope you would be replying to in a product manager thank you for being part of this hearing. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> in a few moments, william hague and hillary clinton talk with reporters about the international response to the situation in libya. in a little more than half an hour, a proposal about a program to help homeowners behind in their mortgage payments. and in a ceremony dedicating the new building for the u.s. mission to the un to the late ron brown. a couple of live events to tell you about tomorrow on our companion network,3,. the senate appropriations energy subcommittee will look into the safety of nuclear power plants in light of the situation in japan. members will hear from the head of our nuclear regulatory commission, 10:00 a.m. eastern.

although later in the day, live on c-span3 8:45 eastern, congressional correspondents dinner. rand paul and anthony wiener of new york, and others. >> for more than a quarter decades, the libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant. muammar gaddafi. he is denied his people's freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorize innocent people around the world. >> follow what key leaders are saying about libya and how the process unfolded from the president and other administration officials, from the house and senate floor, and other leaders around the world, all on line at the c-span video library board search, watch, click, and share any time. >> in libya tuesday, the u.s.

struck a missile storage facility near tripoli will forces loyal to muammar gaddafi the drove back rebels near his home town. in london, foreign ministers and representatives of more than 40 countries met to discuss how to deal with libya. after that meeting, british foreign secretary william hague and secretaries of state hillary clinton spoke with reporters. mr. haig is first, then secretary clinton in 25 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. we have seen two key developments today. first, foreign ministers and leaders from over 40 countries and organizations, including the united nations, the arab league committee organization of the islamic conference, the european union, and nato met here at the london conference on libya. all is our key conclusions in a moment. which we certainly widened and deepened the coalition with the

pledges of support from sweden, a growing number of countries committing to implement the u.n. resolutions on libya, and agreements of new international contact group's on libya. and the interim transitional council have launched here in london a bid for re libya free, democratic, and unified. we said that they want to be in the lead in determining their future. we have a significant milestone in the process. it comes at a time when the forces of the gaddafi regime continue to shell in an indiscriminate and brutal matter. underlining why are effort to protect libyan citizens must and will continue. i have up letter from a member of a local council, banking britain and their allies for our actions to relieve the people

with targeted strikes in the enforcement of the no-fly zone and were coming to the aid of the libyan people, as he puts it, "in their most needy of our." he can confirm there has not been a single civilian death in his area as a result of coalition activity. he goes on to salute the men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line to save the lives of libyans, saying that we are forever grateful. my colleague of qatar is one of our key allies in implementing 1973, and his country are shown great leadership and commitment at a local gatherings like this, and we welcome the fact qatar fact has agreed the host a meeting of the new contact group on libya which we agreed to form

today. before i turn over to him and as chairman of today's conference, allowed to draw your attention to some of the key conclusions of today's meetings which are set out a greater length in documents that will be supplied for you. presence today have reaffirmed the importance of implementation of the u.n. security council resolution, and our strong commitment to this sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence of libya. we are committed to pursuing additional sanctions on individuals and entities associated with the regime. participants here today are implementing these measures as a clear message to gaddafi that it cannot attack civilians with impunity. we have a broad base coalition to implement the military actions mandated by security council resolution 1973, and so far the eyes and we have taken has been successful in protecting countless civilians from gaddafi's forces and

effectively wiping out his air capabilities. participants paid tribute to the bravery and professionalism of military personnel. the potential contributor ends at a separate meeting as part of the conference. we met to underline our commitment to implement the provisions of the resolution. we reaffirm that are unified support for this course of action. we welcomed the nato contribution in agreeing to take on command-and-control of all military operations, to enforce the arms embargo, the no-fly zones, and other actions needed. participants here today have reaffirmed that very clear conditions must be met under the security council resolution, including the establishment of an immediate cease-fire, all to all attacks on civilians, and falls humanitarian access to those in need. we agree to continue our efforts

until all those conditions are fulfilled. the libyan regime will be judged by its actions and not by its words. we agree that it is not for any of the participants here today to overthrow them, on when the libyan people can do that. but they have completely lost legitimacy and will be held accountable for their actions. if we recognize the need for all libyans including the interim transitional national council, tribal leaders, and others to come together to begin an inclusive political process, and we call on the international community to support that process. working closely with u.n. secretary general's special representative. participants today expressed their concern for the well-being of up to 80,000 internally displaced people. we of priorities for humanitarian response. we noted the offer of qatar to facilitate the sale of libyan oil were consistent with international law.

in particular, provisions of the security council resolutions and other rubble of revolutions -- relevant resolutions. to take his work for, participants at the conference agreed to establish the libya contact group. it will meet to provide leadership an overall political direction to the international effort in close coordination with the un, the african union, the arab league, the organization of islamic conference, and others to support libya to provide coronation for the international response on libya and to provide a focal point in the international community for contacts of the libyan parties. qatar has agreed to convene the first meeting of the group, and thereafter the chairmanship will rotate between the countries of the region and beyond it. the north atlantic council meeting alongside its coalition partners will provide the executive political direction for net operations. the participants welcomed the

u.n. secretary-general's offer to lead the coordination of humanitarian assistance and planning for longer term stabilization support. turkey and other key regional players and international agencies offer to support this work and take it floored with the contact group. this conference is shown that we are united in our aim, we are united in seeking a libya that does not pose a threat to its own citizens or to the region or more widely, and did working with the people of libya as they choose their own way forward to a peaceful and stable future. thank you very much and now invite the prime minister and foreign minister of qatar to speak. >> thank you. first of all, i would like to say that we thank britain for this conference, which has become a very important conference after the first conference in paris, because that showed the solidarity of

the allies, and it shows more countries joined this coalition. it is a sad moment, but with hope for the future. a sad moment for what we're seeing in libya, sad to see that we need to try to intervene in a country which belong to the arabs, but we as arabs and the arab league has the international community to participate, to try not to let the libyan people, which is was on the last few weeks, they are using all the heavy machines to kill their own people. we hope that this will finish as soon as possible. hope that the libyan people will decide how they would like to

run their country. we in qatar participated in the humanitarian side and also the no-fly zone by sending some of our planes to that side. and they are doing their mission at the moment when we are talking now. i think the libyan national council -- later the people of libya will decide what to do. i think this conference was good to evaluate what is being done over the last few days from the military action, and what we can do. , we ask gaddafi and his people to leave and not support any more bloodshed. i think this is the only solution to sort this problem as soon as possible. by now we do not see any indication of that, but this

hope which we offer it now might not be on the table after a few days. i am not warning anybody here, but i am trying to stop the bloodshed as soon as possible. thank you very much. >> now we have time for a few questions. bayh press secretary will point them out. >> nick robinson, bbc news. do you both fear that it may not be possible to protect the libyan civilians from the air? at yesterday's conference, did they discuss the possibility of forming the opposition as they have requested? or do you fear that if you did it, you might be forming some who have al qaeda sympathies? >> we did not discuss at the conference today arming the opposition. there was no one of the subject for discussion. we discussed all the things that i just set out. all of which are designed to detect civilian life in libya.

-- protect civilian life in libya. it was not at the conference or on the agenda for discussion. you're right that the subject has been raised by the interim transitional national council. but it is not part of any agreement today. the united kingdom takes into account the u.n. security council resolution on this, and those resolutions applied to the whole of libya. although consistent with u.n. security council 1973, to give people a in order to defend themselves in particular. volume not discuss that so there is known new information to communicate to you about that. >> i like to read to what sir william said. we did not discuss that definitely, but it is our opinion that we have to

evaluate after a while to see if it is affected. to protect the people of libya. the international community has to see what sort of measures -- we're not talking about invading libya or inviting in the military. we're evaluating the situation because we cannot let the people suffer for so long. we have to find a way to stop the bloodshed. but in the past days of what is happening, we need to evaluate at some time later. >> next question. the microphone is on its way. >> from the daily telegraph. are you all concerned that they may take advantage of this resolution -- revolution taking

place in libya? whether they would be muslim brotherhood or whether they be more extreme in terms of al qaeda? >> i think the initial answer to that is the document was published by the interim transitional national council this afternoon, and as you are aware of the vision of the democratic libya, that is a document i was very pleased to see. i would indeed encourage them to release it because it includes so many of the things that we would like to say, some in the thick of the fence that we would like to see about the future of libya, including the summation of political parties, the genuine political political participation, freedom of expression, the media, people in protests -- it is the right documents and the right set of commitments for the future of libya. also talking about using science and technology for the

betterment of society, a brief private-sector, and effective civil society, these are strong commitments an absolute right commitments from the opposition forces in libya. and i think they are sincere in putting those forward as their plan, having discussed them with some of my representatives this morning and talked the other of the representatives, my telephone over the last few weeks, i am sure that that is sincere. but we must never be complacent about the way events like this could turn out. one other reasons it is necessary for the european union, in view of the prime minister david cameron and night, to make a bold and historic offer to the nations of this region is to try to act as a magnet for this kind of positive change, given that that if things go wrong in the region on a sustained basis, there

could be new opportunities for terrorism or extremism. we must not be complacent about that. but i am sure the what we are doing to protect civilians, to encourage a political process in libya to which libyans can choose their own spin -- their own government, is the right way to combat those dangers of terrorism and extremism. >> all like to add a little bit. this happened partly because of how we are dealing with people in the middle east. this is a part of what is being put by the mid leaders because they want to stay in power. i think we should not look at the left or the right people come of muslim brotherhood, we should look to them how they behave. did you do something better, if

we are looking for democracy, let the democracy come and decide who takes power. if we want to go further why it happened, we have also not appear to affect some states, and by letting everyone decide what they want for their country. >> cnn. mr. hague, the prime minister to said that you need to increase your political pressure on muammar gaddafi a to step down. and that you're looking for countries for him to take refuge. could you talk about what efforts you are doing to increase the political pressure on him to step down? for the prime minister, in that

is states in particular and other nations of nato have asked for arab leadership and support for this effort, which was a pretext for going to the u.n. security council resolution. why these a more rigid what you think more arab nations have not joined qatar and united arab emirate in joining this coalition? t expect more to join in the coming days? >> would you like to that first? >> when we went to the arab league, by an enormous majority except for one country, we decided to go to the security council and asked for a no-fly zone. we told them the alternative, tells see the people killed, slaughtered, or we had to go to the united nations. i agree with you that the arab

involvement is not so big. or not so complete. but it is there are some arab countries participating physically and some arab countries participating in the conference here in london. i hope it will increase. and i hope the arab league has mechanisms to do these things to avoid these things happening asking for international help. this is an internal error problem. we could not do it by ourselves, but to show our solidarity in qatar and our belief, we join the international community. >> on the question of gaddafi stepping down, the unity from such a wide variety of nations in the arab world, and as the prime minister's been talking about, the role and did their role of the early, and the

united nations, as well as the arab league, the european union, the strong unanimity, the strong emphasis on what i was saying earlier that we all agreed that gaddafi and his regime had completely lost legitimacy and will be held accountable for their actions, that is an extremely strong, intensely strong international pressure for him to go. there is no future for libya with gaddafi in charge of libya or trying to hang on to power there. that is clear. all of these nations and organizations, we have made that emphatically clear today. [inaudible] well, questions one at a time come up but we support the reference of the international criminal court. we are not engaged in looking for somewhere for him to go in the united kingdom. that does not exclude others.

al jazeera, where they? >> my first question to the prime minister, qatar was the first to contribute to the operation. we saw today on the list of arab countries from morocco to others. will there be more contributions from other arab countries and the operation? , if you said there was a sacred -- is said there were a difference between the actual and potential contributors? can you give an idea to the potential? >> about the participation of

the arabs, as i mentioned, there is some error been dissipation meeting in london here. -- arab participation meeting in london. . we're not trying to push the other to be part of this, but we have some believes, and our beliefs let us participate from day one, and others go to the conference and asked for a no- fly zone. the arab league supported the idea of no-fly zone. to be perfectly legal, we went to the security council. all this gathering here in london are emphatically about that. the people will not allow the international community -- the international community gaddafi will not community gaddafi to kill his people, will not allow what happened in libya. for us, when we saw lois of the first few days, we thought that

this is a shame to said that it is not our business. it is arab business. unfortunately i think the participation of the arab -- i am glad that there are arab countries taking it seriously. i think this is the example of how we can cooperate between us and nato in the united nations, i think this is the first coalition which was demanded by the arabs. it is not like any other coalition that happen before. >> on the question of potential contributors come out one of those at the meeting had not contributed before, but they announced today -- sweden is not a nato country, and they announce their participation but eight fighter aircraft in the no-fly zone and other logistical support. there are other countries

discussing with us, making a contribution to the military operations, but i think they have to make their own announcements, and it is not fair for me to make those announcements or anticipate them. they will make them in due course. [inaudible] the answer is the same. >> you keep calling on gaddafi to go but you have been bombing him steadily enough for 10 days and hints shows no sign of budging. but will be your next move? >> we've not been bombing him. we have been bombing the forces threatening the civilians. i think it is important recognize what we have achieved and that time. had we not pass the un resolution when we did and then acted on it so promptly, a week last saturday, it only seems likely that benghazi with have

been stormed. if it had not been for our intervention, morocco would not let fallen. in each case, with potentially great loss of life and catastrophic humanitarian consequences. yes, we have been engaged in this now for 10 days, but i think in those 10 days, we achieved a great deal and we have saved many lives. and it does seem from all of today's activity in libya that despite a third proclamation of a ceasefire or partial cease- fire just today, the gaddafi regime is still embarked on prosecuting a war against the people of their own country. and that means is you can tell from the statements i made on behalf of the whole conference today, that since the conditions of a cease-fire and an end to violence are not filled, then operations to protect the civilians in these locations in

libya will continue. is very important that that unified commitment is very clear. i think it is the gaddafi regime that has to wonder and worry where that leaves the international community, it is absolutely robust and clear, absolutely united that we will continue on this course of action which has already saved some lives and less light it will be necessary to save even more. and that is worthwhile doing, and it is the right thing to do, and it's been very strongly endorsed at this conference today. we're going to go now because secretary clinton will be with you shortly. we will give you a short break before she arrives. thank you very much indeed.

>> i apologize for my voice. good afternoon. i want to begin by expressing certainly our gratitude to the prime minister and foreign secretary and the entire government for hosting this important conference. i have just concluded a very full day of business covering an array of issues with a broad range of counterparties. i began the day meeting with representatives of the libyan transitional national council. i heard their perspective on the situation in libya. we talked about how our efforts to protect civilians and to meet humanitarian needs, and about the ongoing coalition military action in support of resolution 1973. we also discussed the need for a

political solution and transition in libya. i reiterated the support of the united states on behalf of president obama for the legitimate aspirations of the libyan people, and our commitment to helping them achieve those aspirations. i also had the opportunity to meet with both prime minister cameron and with foreign minister hague. i expressed in that state's gratitude for the leadership the u.k. has shown in building up the international response to libya. the military, political, and humanitarian dimension. we also discussed events and broader trends across the middle east and north africa, and our joint efforts in afghanistan and pakistan. i had the opportunity to consult with the number of other counterparts about libya. today's conference is taking place at the moment of

transition has made it takes over as leader of the coalition mission, a mission in which the united states will continue to play an active supporting role. some of our coalition partners announced additional support and contributions to date, which we welcome. in addition to our joint military efforts, we discussed the need for progress in libya along the freed non-military tracks. first, delivering humanitarian assistance. second, pressuring and isolating the gaddafi regime through robust sanctions and other measures. and third, supporting efforts by the libyans to achieve the political changes that they are seeking. we also agreed on a structure for decision making going forward on both the military and political tracts. all the military side, we agreed that the north atlantic council with coalition partners fully at the table will be the sole provider of executive direction

or nato operations. similar to the it isaf approach for afghanistan. on the political side, we agreed to establish a contact group to offer a systematic coordination mechanism and broad political guidance on the full range of efforts under resolution 197019 -- resolution 1970 and resolution 1973. and as you heard from the prime minister of qatar, they have agreed to host the first meeting of the contact group along with the u.k. in a series of site meetings, i had a chance to discuss a number of issues including syria. i expressed our strong condemnation of the syrian government's brutal repression of demonstrations, in particular the killing of civilians in the hand of security forces. i also discussed efforts that are undertaken by the organization of islamic conference, particularly our

joint effort to pass a resolution at the human rights council that promotes tolerance and respect as well as free expression. we greatly appreciate the oic hosting a group in qatar. i was able to consult on the number of regional matters, including libya, with foreign minister doug of tolu -- the foreign minister of turkey. we came to speak in one voice in support of a transition that lead to a brighter future for the libyan people. i am very pleased with the progress that we have made, both today and in the days preceding it. and i'm grateful for everyone who participated in the conference, and in the broader effort in libya. i think that we are making a lot of progress together, and we couldn't do it unless we were representing the international community as we are.

with that, i would be happy to take your question. >> first question from reuters. >> madam secretary, in your meeting today with the turkish foreign minister, were you able the offer concrete assistance -- the libyans, where you able to offer concrete assistance like financial assets? and there were also flickers about kite that in the opposition, how much of the concern is that? -- about al qaeda in the opposition, how much of the concern is that? >> we of not made any decision about arming the rebels are providing any arms transfers. there has not been any need to discuss that at this point. we did discussed nonlethal assistance, ways of trying to

enable the transition national council to meet a lot of their financial needs and how we could do that through the international community, given the challenge that sanctions pose, but recognizing that they obviously are going to need funds to keep themselves going. we discussed a broad range of matters, and certainly their presentation which some of you may have seen earlier today, as to what kind of civil society and political structure they are trying to build in libya, are exactly in line with what they have consistently said were their goals. their commitment to democracy in a very robust engagement with people from across the spectrum of libyans is, i think, appropriate.

we do not have any specific affirmation -- information about specific individuals from any organization who are part of this, but we are still getting to know those who are leading the trend -- a transitional national council, and they will be a process that continues. >> our next question is from the times in london. >> is it your understanding to the un resolution 1973 makes it illegal to supply arms to the libyan rebels, argued should get to that? and secondly, the rebels were talking earlier -- they clearly have access to a lot of funds through oil money.

should they be more transparent in terms of declaring who they are, where they are from, what kind of group in the come from, and where they got the money? >> it is our interpretation that 1973 amended or overrode the absolute prohibition of arms to anyone in libya, so that there could be legitimate transfer of arms if the country were to choose to do that. as i said, we have not made that decision at this time. secondly, i think the greater transparency will be expected and will be delivered, and we have to put this into context, and this is a very fast evolving, but by no means settled structure that they are

trying to build. they also claim to have a number of people who are willing to work with them from central and western libya of who for security reasons cannot yet been named. i think that this is a work in progress, and with respect to in the's question, we do not know as much as we would like to know and as much as we expect we will not. we're picking up information, a lot of context is going on, many governments part of the coalition. so we're building an understanding. at this time, obviously, it is a work in progress. >> "wall street journal." >> regarding syria, over the weekend you give an interview were you said how many members of congress viewed president

assad as a reformer. is that your position? it is been well documented, his support for terrorist groups, allegations for the pursuit of nuclear problems, and he could pose a later third to the united states, more than libya. is it the obama administration's position that it can work with president assad to initiate the reforms that his people are clearly calling for? >> as you rightly pointed out, i referenced opinions of others. i was not speaking for myself or for the administration. we deplore the crackdown that is occurring in syria,; syria as we have throughout the last month to respect the rights of its citizens to allow people to protest peacefully, to work for political and economic reform that would lead to the benefit

of the syrian people. there is no difference in how we view this and how we have viewed the other incredible sequence of actions that we've seen in north africa and in the middle is. we hope there is an opportunity for reform in all of these countries. we want to see peaceful transitions. we want to see democracies they represent the will of the people. people,ke the syrian waiting and watching to see what will come from the syrian government. they dismissed the cabinet today, which resigned on mass en masse --which resign en masse. they have demands such as immediately eliminating serious

state of emergency laws which have been the fact for a long time. it is up to the syrian government and up to the leadership, starting with tosident bashir assad prove that it can be responsive to the needs of its own people. we're troubled by what we hear, but we will continue to urge that the promise of reform, which has been made over and over again, and which you reported on just a few months ago, i am a reformer, i am going to reform, and i've talked to members of congress and others about that, that we hear from the highest levels of leadership in syria, will actually be turned into reality. that is what we're waiting and watching for. >> in the final question. >> i wondered how he viewed the situation in libya at the moment. there seems to be a bit of

almost ping-pong going on. the rebels seem to be withdrawing from some areas today. how easy the situation is evolving in libya, how long do you see it lasting? and if you're talking to gaddafi, what are his options? is there a third option where he could travel to another country? >> i think the what we are seeing in libya is a strengthening of the opposition, a consistent and very persistent effort by the opposition to try to hold crown which they have had and to regain ground which they have lost. we're also saying unfortunately with gaddafi a continuing pressure on the rebels, on his

people, a willingness to use force. we had the report today of continuing military actions by gaddafi's forces in ms. randa and elsewhere. -- misrata and elsewhere. we have accomplished a lot in a short period of time. as president obama said last night, we believe we prevented a massacre and benghazi, that we were able to stop the military advance that was moving rapidly from west to east. and we sent a clear message through the international community's willingness to enforce a no-fly zone and protect civilians that that kind of ruthless behavior by a leader toward his own people would not be tolerated. this is happened so quickly that we are now facing questions like

the ones you asked. i am not sure that we know exactly when we will get to any change in attitude by gaddafi and those around him. as you know, there is a lot are reaching out that is occurring, a lot of conversations going on. as the arab league has said, it is obvious to everyone that gaddafi has lost the legitimacy to lead. we believe he must go. we're working with the international community to try to achieve that outcome. he will have to make a decision, and that decision so far as we are where has not yet been made. you probably know that the secretary general's special envoy will be going to tripoli and benghazi, once again, to urge gaddafi to implement a real cease-fire that is not going to be immediately reached by his

own forces. to withdraw from those areas that is taken by force, and to look for a political resolution, which could include his leaving the country. all of this is in play. many of the nations that were here in london today are working together to try to gather information, to share the impressions each has with the conversations that are coming from tripoli, and some close to gaddafi about what is and isn't being considered. i expect to see things continue to move in a positive direction, but i cannot by any means give you any sort of time line. that is just not sensible of this point. we do not have not enough information to do that. >> thank you all very much.