egypt and the people of egypt .hat will make that decision >> we are working right now with the government on several things. we are working on the question of how those inspections might take place. we are working on trying to the kurds together with the prime minister in a discussion that can bring people back together and get the democratic process back on track. there has been a real breach of that with respect to the kurds. he has not visited baghdad in

about two years. pushedel they have been away from the governing process. hard, it is hard work. it is hard work for people who live not experienced it. ever. we all need to work closely together, which is exactly what we are doing now. with hopes the prime minister will make the right choices to bring people together, to offer people a united election when it takes place in a few weeks and to offer people the democracy that americans invested in so heavily with their treasure of their young men and women who gave their lives and with a large amount of american taxpayer dollars. >> last one today. [speaking foreign language]

peace process,a questionon nance -- my is, do you have any questions -- any plans on suggesting -- for instance, a reopening the tourist visits. out totion going secretary, ever since you remember of the senate, you've always emphasize the importance of diplomacy and dialogue. was one of your standing principles. i know you spoke about that kind of principle when dealing with the north koreans. under what circumstances, situation with the united states be prepared to resume dialogue with the north koreans? do you have any specific

conditions in mind in order to resume dialogue with the north koreans? if you have any plans on spent -- sending a special envoy to north korea? first of all, the situation on the korean peninsula -- it is critically important for the u.s. and south korea to enhance its defense capabilities. we will always speak -- we will north koreanase of provocation. if north korea decides to give up its nuclear ambitions and be a member of the international community, we are prepared to resume talks in terms of putting in place of peace process on the korean peninsula. korea needs to make it

clear that they are prepared to have a serious discussion about the new -- denuclearization. they know exactly what the goal is. they know exactly what the terms are. we are prepared. president obama has said repeatedly we are prepared to enter into a dialogue and negotiation if they are serious, if they will stop the provocations and engage in serious discussion. we have always said that we would like to try to resolve the problems of the entire peninsula. that means making peace, but making peace does not involve having a nuclear north and disadvantaged republic of korea to the south. they know very well what the terms are. with respect to the question of the convoy, we have an envoy. the ambassador is appointed already, he is here. if the circumstances are correct

issues anorth korea indication that it is serious about trying to resolve this issue. i would just say this, i think this important, we face danger, at not just to the republic of korea, but a danger to the entire region and the world, of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. and we face a to respect -- in respect to iran. president obama could not have been more clear in respect to both. his policy is the denuclearization of north korea because that is the only way to begin to end the conflict and create safety in the region. the last thing the world needs is more nuclear nations at the very time the nuclear nations are trying to reduce their

current numbers of nuclear weapons and control this danger. we face the question of iran. iran knows very well it has an opportunity this weekend. the iranian people are great people. they have a long history. many times longer than the united states of america. they have an ability to rejoin the community of nations to get out from under this isolation if they will choose this simple ways of proving, as other nations prove, that they have peaceful nuclear energy. it's that simple. it is not complicated. our hope is that that initiative can began in earnest this weekend where we will have a team prepared to negotiate and in the days ahead, we can reach another -- and understanding that will move us. trying with respect to the

korean peninsula to make the world safer. that is what this is about. we have no ambitions there. i think they know that. we want to see a peaceful community of nations trading with each other, working to improve the lives of their citizens and that is in direct contrast to the north, which maintains glads, has thousands of political prisoners, tradespeople and the most inhumane way, -- tradespeople in the most inhumane way, and stars their people. that could not be a bigger -- and starves their people. that could not be a bigger choice. >> thank you very much.

>> on the issue of north korea, abc news is reporting that general james thurman said that in his two years on the job, he has never seen things as tense as they are right now. the situation on the korean peninsula is volatile and dangerous. north korea was the topic at today's pentagon briefing. george little answer questions about u.s. warships off the coast of north korea and monitoring potential missile launches. if you could sort out some of the deployments and so forth in regard to north korea, the korean peninsula. can you explain what is will perform some

missions in that area? a lot of reporting i would like to clear up. sbx radar.t with it is undergoing scheduled trials. undergoing some annual system checks. decisions about for their deployment had not been made at this point. arrived at predetermined positions in the western pacific. our commander regularly deploys in the region to respond to missile threats.

>> the point i wanted to press to its-- it was on route home port. it is it -- is it being held up for this mission? did it happen to be passing through? >> it has arrived in a predetermined location in the west pacific. there was some reporting yesterday that the guided missile destroyers were stationed off the north korean coast. that is incorrect. in the western pacific. >> is that a yes to my question? -- is being held to approve we've -- to perform a mission? >> it will be at the location in the western pacific to perform a

missile defense mission. those -- correct? >> that is correct. >> how far are they off the peninsula? how do we best describe the location? the pacific is pretty big. >> incredible. i do not mean to be unspecific, but we do not talk about the precise location of their -- of our ships. we regulate conduct missile defense missions in the asia- pacific region. performcontinue to these missions regardless of what tensions mayor may not be. may not be.

>> is available to track a missile should there be launched? is it part of the missile defense system right now? >> i will not get into the details. my colleagues can assist you with the technical details on this particular platform. it is undergoing a semiannual systems check. >> you regulate conduct missile defense missions. does that mean? it is on a regular missile mission? defenseare on a missile mission right now. we are posturing to protect our allies and our own interest. i will not get into specifics of these missions. there are rigid their part of

the constellation of the defense capabilities available in the pacific. only destroyers that are available at the moment? >> i am going to leave it here. i will not discuss the mix of our assets. i do want to clarify. >> [inaudible] >> let me give you some details. let me be very clear, we want

peace and stability in the korean peninsula. for over 60 years, we have had an alliance. we want to ensure peace and stability on the peninsula and in the region. hope that others see to do the same. washingtons out of today from capitol hill. mark burk of illinois became the second republican senator to come out in favor of gay marriage. he said "same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. our time on earth is limited, i know that better than most. wife comes down to who you love and who loves you back. government has no place in the middle." >> she was out there, respectable women.

this was a new era. this is the time when the is under wayent and interestingly enough, someone like julia tyler, she is very conservative in some ways. in terms of breaking through the traditional ways that women should behave, she is doing its in a way that other women are not. >> our conversation with historians on julia tyler. it is now available on our website. >> the nra calls for training school teachers to carry firearms. the nra commissioned a task force on school violence headed by a former congressman. he released a plan today in washington, armed guards and armed teachers would allow for a quick response to a school shooting.

>> good morning. i am asa hutchinson and i welcome you to this important presentation to increase school safety. i received a call last december from the nra. they asked if i would be interested in leading an effort on school safety. we arrived at a agreement which is my mandate. we will not have any predetermined outcomes. we would have the full support to employ the experts to develop a review of our national efforts on school safety and make the recommendations as appropriate.

the nra has fulfilled their side of the bargain. they have given us the support needed to reach their product that we are presenting today. there is no guarantee the nra will accept these recommendations. these are the recommendations of the task force. i did want to introduce the members of the task force that are here today. we're delighted that some of them have joined us. on the first row is ralph -- where are you? over here to the side.

former commissioner of u.s. customs. lawxpert in the field of enforcement and security. we have a retired colonel, was air force security officer, former joint staff's anti- terrorism and homeland defense director at the pentagon. ceo of phoenix solutions. former deputy assistant secretary for critical infrastructure protection. we want to recognize some of the other members of the task force that have arrived at this report. i am pleased to release the comprehensive report of the national school shield initiative.

this report includes everything from best practices to technology to review of surveillance and includes the recommendations that i will present later in this presentation. for over three months, these experts have engaged in the assessments of multiple schools of sizes, of composition. and have done assessments evaluations of best practices and vulnerabilities. withconducted interviews people knowledgeable in the

field. the president of the national association of school security and a commander of school security in the philadelphia school district. thank you for joining us. one of the experts in the field. i want to go through some of the findings from the school assessments. we will present our recommendations from the task force. we will have a comment from a special guest and open it up for questions and answers. i wanted to cover some of the things that we found. we looked at the interior and an exterior doors, architecture and design of the schools.

then we look at the armed officers and the staff that may be armed. we believe they make a difference in the various layers of security. we found something very significant. there is really a two-tiered layer of security in our schools. school officers, technology and magnetometersnd

and policy development. then you have the smaller schools, the middle sized schools, those that have resource challenges. and policy development. they are part of a major focus will need to have. our recommendations are directed at the schools that are trying to do something with school safety but are struggling with the resources to do it. look at perimeter fencing. you'll see they are not adequate perimeter fencing for a school. ones that do might not be in proper repair.

use the technology to have a single point of access for visitors to check in and to show identification. we find that many of them have surveillance cameras. it might be at the ceiling level rather than at the eye level. look at the doors which are so critical. some of them do not have the hinge coverings to protect the and exterior doors. is there and an anti-carding device? windowsrior doors and in our best practices show some of the state of the art designed for interior doors. the windows so often go around the interior doors. are they sufficient to protect against an intruder. the bus operation.

all the buses lined up to pick up the students. fore is better practices how the buses a line so you did not convert it all the students in one place as they load and unload from the buses. we've looked at the personnel badges. sometimes the badges are not worn. sro training. there is some enhancements in

training that can improve not just their training but also their coordination with law enforcement. then the armed security staff. there has been a movement to consider armed security staff. the findings referencing managing threat information which goes to the mental health side of the school environment and whether there is proper collection of threat information and response, whether it is through the action of counselors in addressing any mental health challenge in the schools. there's a compilation as an appendix to this report. the best practices that we found around the nation reflecting some of the work of the to problem of education and the department of justice and the department of homeland security and appalling that together.

let me move to the recommendations of our task force. these recommendations have three audiences. first would be the national rifle association for long-term support in the area of school safety, to reflect their strong commitment in that area. second would be to state policy makers. the third audience is the federal policy makers. our first recommendation is for model training programs. we have presented a model training program for school resource officers that is an enhancement of what they currently undertake an hour required.

it is 40 to 60 hours of training. that is an appendix in the presentation. we have prepared a model training program for a selected armed school personnel. this is probably the one item that catches everybody's attention. why is is part of our recommendations? there is the incident in pearl high school in 1997. an active shooter went into the school and killed two students and wounded others.

the assistant principal left the school and went to his truck and retrieved his semi-automatic firearm and return to the school and disarm the the assailants. that is an example where the response is critical. the key is reducing that response time. if he had been trained or had access on his person, he might have saved more lives. and so -- one of the findings of the team went through one school that did not have school resource officers and they were plotting to arm school staff. when the inquiry was made about what kind of training do you have, it was clearly insufficient training.

schools don't have adequate direction on what is a model program for armed personnel. teachers should teach. if there is a person out with good experience and is willing to go through this training of 40 to 60 hours, then that is an appropriate resource that a school should be able to utilize. we have to adopt changing the law so it allows a firearm to be carried by school personnel when they go through this model training program. we have a model state law that can be considered for this

purpose. the third recommendation is an interagency agreement between the law enforcement agency and the school. thateard the concern police personnel in the school or armed guards in the school somehow increases the episodes of juvenile delinquency and the reporting of disciplinary action rather than treating them as routine school disciplinary incidence. they need to have clear understandings reflected in a memorandum of understanding between the school and the law enforcement agency.

a critical tool, an online assessment tool that is web- based that the schools can utilize that would be on the national school shield website. ins tool has been summarized the document that we are presenting. schools have to hire an expert or they struggle with local law enforcement to develop their policies. this tool is available for any school free of charge on the website and will not be something a principal can fill out. the school will have to be able to get access and they will be asked questions on access control. does the school and forced it to visitor sign-in and access control? what actions are taken when on authorized visitors are detected? those are a sample of the questions.

then they go to the best practices to address the solutions for their security policies. a change in state education policies. we define in our state education advocacy based on the curriculum the students take. a key part is that they have done a safety assessment and they have a plan that is in place. that is a recommendation for the states. they do something in terms of assessment. the federal policy makers -- we need to have improved coordination and more directed funding.

we have three departments of the government that are all engaged in school safety -- education, justice, and homeland security. they need to have a lead agency with greater coordination. the federal role is greater support for innovation and training grants. the school districts have absorbed the cost and they are prepared to do that.

the seventh recommendation is to the nra. the national school shield become an umbrella organization to support school safety across this nation the the free access into the best practices that will be available to the and to create pilot programs to fine-tune the assessment tool and also to look at pilot programs in mental health and to answer questions. termecommend a long- commitment through the national school shield. we have a specific pilot program on a threat assessment and mental health.

the secret service found that 71% of attackers felt threatened or bullied. that is a pre-indicator. we recommend the nss partnering with other partners interested in mental health and that we can create programs that will state of the art encouraging information sharing, identify threats and offering counseling support. please read the report. it is accessible online.

please give close attention to the appendices that are attached to it. now i want to introduce who is the parent of james who was killed at the sandy hook elementary school, which triggered the national review of this issue of school safety. mark has expressed an interest in school safety and has asked to make a comment. so, mark? >> good morning. i wanted to take a minute and applaud the task force and the nra for spending the time and resources for putting a program like this together.

it is important that everybody recognizes -- we send our children off to school. expectationstain and in sandy hook, those expectations were not met. this is a comprehensive program. i think politics should be set aside. i hope this does not lead to name calling. these are recommendations for solutions. solutions to make our kids safer. i read a report from 2002 which has some great input. what was done at the federal, state, and local level out of that report to make newtown or yorktown safer?

i put this on you to implement solutions so people do not have to go through what i'm going through. i was on google this morning. nine school shootings since newtown. i do not know that everybody got the press with respect to the impact. i just applaud you for doing this. i think it is important. look what took place at sandy hook. mental health. that is a big component of this. we need the kids to be safe. they allow for a positive interaction with law enforcement

professional. people knew about what people had in mind but they didn't report it to somebody. we have to prevent this going forward. [applause] >> thank you, mark. now we would be happy to take questions. yes, sir. >> you talk about training volunteers. [indiscernible]

>> is there a microphone around here? >> in terms of volunteers, my impression is there would be great reluctance from school superintendents. we have shifted to school staff, trained school staff that is designated by the school board. there is a discussion for every school district in terms of sro's and armed school staff and volunteers as well. one is a liability concern. the issue is addressed in the best practices. the school's all-time elite make these decisions.

u.s. about the cost of this effort. $1 million by the nra to fund this effort. they have supported it. looking at the support, you can see it it is a substantial investments. yes, ma'am. [indiscernible] our whole effort is about school safety. the impact i hope we have is that we talk about things that will keep children safe for in school. these types of programs from

the private sector and support from the policy makers. we want the debate focused on school safety. yes, sir? [indiscernible] >> do you see any common ground to work together? >> well, i help they continue to talk and work together. i have not focused on the separate debate in congress about firearms and how they should be dealt with. when they are seeking common ground, i hope this will be the common ground. there are common sense steps that can be taken by policy

makers. president obama supports additional funding on school safety. it is focused and you can open up the biggest chunk -- additional grants through homeland security to the schools. they can compete with additional dollars. yes, sir? >> recent polling on gun legislation shows more than 80% of americans support universal background checks. why is that proposal not part of your shield?

>> my organization is represented in this room. we might have won a few of background checks. our focus is on school safety and making our schools a safer environment. we all want to make sure that criminals, those that had been declared with mental issues, that they not have access. that is a discussion that will go on. we're trying to do something about school safety. >> you would agree that non-sro personnel might be armed inside a school and they should an extensive background

check. >> that is part of the recommendation. any school staff designated by the school to be a trained, armed response. they would go through background checks and testing and screening and then 40 to 60 hours of training. everybody has a different level of background and experience. that is a very comprehensive program. armed designated as an response should have the adequate training to accomplish the task and be safe. [indiscernible]

>> you mean in terms of an accident? one thing you know for sure is the response time is critical. just like the assistant principal that i mentioned. getad to go to is truck to a gun. if you can reduce the response time, it will save lives. that is the objectives. firearm retention and how they know how to protect that and to make sure it is properly cared for. that is a key element of the model training program. >> you talk about response time. the shooter in newtown got off

dozens of rounds. >> in reference to newtown, what was the first thing the school did after the incident? they got armed officers to protect the children. they did not have response capability. you had teachers giving up their lives. we want to have a better response, to give the schools respondls so they can quickly. yes, sir. >> if any part of the national school shield involves coordination with the bureau of

alcohol tobacco and firearms or a push with the nra to support that? i'm wondering if the atf was involved? >> we focus on education, home and security, and justice. that has been our focus and not the atf. [indiscernible] >> the nra is entering a gun problem with more guns.

>> every local school district will make a decision. we have -- i talked him at the philadelphia school district. every high school student goes through a magnetometer. i respect that decision. other school districts want to have an armed response. they want to have a different capability. we are giving them an option. if you're interested in making the schools safer and to save children's lives, look these recommendations seriously. the presence of an armed security in a school is a layer

that is just as important as a mental health component. if you have the armed presence without locking doors, it is inadequate. inis a comprehensive plan which the armed school personnel is one element. >> does your report show how many armed personnel would be needed at a school? what do we do about recess? >> excellent question. there is no specific recommendations on how many sro's or armed personnel is in a specific school. john?

>> not specifically for the school. make sure you're looking at the entire posture of your school, your building, the number of students. >> it will be up to the school to determine the level of resources. an sro in every school building is important. right now you have sro's rotating between maybe three campuses. i would judge that insufficient. there should be at least one and every school campus to reduce response time. >> would you review the relationships between the school and the nra?

>> the relationship between -- ok. the relationship -- i am employed as a consultant that leads this task force in which i have asked each of these experts to independently look at the issue of school safety and to make these recommendations. whether this is unanimous? everybody has signed off on this report. there is probably a lot of different political leanings and different viewpoints that are reflected.

there is a unity of opinion when it comes to these recommendations on school safety. [indiscernible] it is important that they be trained with the firearm that they carry and utilize. they have to practice with that. there is no specific recommendation on that. it is everything from and sidearm to shotgunned to ar-15. there is a variety of weapons that are utilized by the school officers based upon their local leadership and what they determine is best for their environment.

u.s. question about the presence of security. go into a mall there is security. there is security here at the national press club. there is nothing i am afraid of. i'm very wide open. there is nothing i'm nervous about. yes, ma'am. >> is it the conclusion that every school in the united states should have an armed presence? >> the specific findings is the

presence of an armed security personnel in a school adds a layer of security and diminishes response time that is beneficial to the overall security. we recognize that the decision is locally made. some school districts decide not to go that direction. we want to make sure our resources are available whenever decision is made. i come from a rural state. the smaller school districts struggle. this is a key tool to provide more options for school security and safety.

>> what is the average cost to train one of these -- to maintain them every year? >> what you come up here? tony. >> the program is about 40 to 60 hours. the average cost is somewhere around $800 to $1,000 per student. there is not set cost right now that we of the attached to the program. we have made the recommendations but we're not attached a price to that. when i say student i mean student in the training

programs, not students in the schools. >> last question. schooldoes it cost the -- how do you justify paying for that? >> you justify it because it is necessary. schools reference to a resource officer might cost $60,000 in one jurisdiction and well over $100,000 in another. it varies. the trading costs should be a more constant. how does a school justify it? look at the armed school personnel.

the cost would be for the 40 to 60 hours. then the training cost itself. there's a lot of different ways the trading can be accomplished by the states. it would be by professional private sector trainers. it could be by the law enforcement entity in the state. we want to make sure it is accessible and we have as many traders that are properly trained as possible. that was a follow-up. [indiscernible]

that is the sandy hook report you are referring to? [indiscernible] i would be interested in what connecticut is doing for school safety. i will cite it is totally inadequate. you can address assault weapons and a dozen stop somebody bringing in a .45 caliber firearm into the school. it doesn't stop violence in the schools. you have to do something about school safety and enhancing our safety measures in the school.

it can be done. that is the purpose of this task force. thank you for your work in this. that this will be a long-term commitment by the in our ray to be a national leader in school safety. a key for your attendance today. -- thank you for your attendance today. >> just before the nra conference today, elijah cummings also spoke about gun violence. he is sponsoring legislation that would make gun trafficking a federal crime and increase penalties for straw purchases of guns. he spoke with the national press club for over and hour. -- for almost an hour.

>> hi everybody. ok, we will begin. we are timely here. welcome to the national press club. happy easter and passover season to everyone. happy spring. the national press club is the leading organization for journalists, and the place where news happens. i am bob wiener. to havee are honored , asemen elijah cummings democrat from baltimore, who will present a reality check on gun legislation. he is a breaking number of the oversight and government reform committee, which is my old committee.

he -- he's the former chairman of the congressional black caucus. he takes the gun safety issue personally, and points to his nephew who was found murdered in a random act at university where he was a student. despite projections of congressional action after the newtown, connecticut massacre of 26 people, including children are, neither legislation is moved to either chamber. -- president obama designated as president joe biden to chair a white house task force, which executive -- resulted in executive orders, and is urging legislation, including

background checks. represented cummings will speak about the gun trafficking legislation as well as other pending bills. representative cunning -- cummings represents the seventh district in baltimore county. in addition to his leadership committee -- he is a member of the joint economic committee, and the trans-portion -- transportation committee. he's the congresses later on drug policy. that is how i met him when i was working with the drug office, -- he was elected to the u.s. house in 1996 after serving the maryland house of delegates for 14 years. he was the first ever an american in maryland history to be named the maryland house speaker pro tem bora, the

second-highest office. he states he dedicated his life of service to uplifting and empowering people. ground rules today. congressman cummings will speak for 20 minutes followed by questions from press club members. arielle, if you could stand up. she is a student at the university of pennsylvania, and a course called "dealing with take the," will micromanager that you do not abuse the privilege of the question. i yourself as you asked questions.

-- please identify yourself as you asked questions. , rightto thank richard here, of my staff. he will also assist. the national press club staff, many of them, as well as the congressman's staff, sophia simmons, jennifer, jean, -- jimmy, andn carlos. it seems somewhat to treat gun safety legislation as a april fool's joke in our timing. or they want to wait until the next massacre to bring attention back to it. , theashington post today lease sortie for those who saw it, rogue on forces target key bills. -- pro-gun forces target key

bills. i'm going to read the first read paragraphs. the control measures that seem destined to become law are in jeopardy amid a fierce lobbying committee. he senators have been unable to find a workable plan for near the verso background checks on gun purchases, and id -- an idea that polls support. making gun trafficking a federal crime could be gutted if republican lawmakers accept new language being circulated by the national rifle association. shouldn't we all be outraged? clearly, conversely cummings is a leader in the field, and one we must hear from today. the national press club is the place where news is made, and we are so thrilled that you are

here to do it. congressman elijah conga -- congressman elijah cummings. >> thank you, very much. to be here this morning. honoralways a tremendous to be in the presence of my wife, i want to thank you for being here today. today, i want to talk about an issue that is extremely personal for me and my family. that is the issue of gun violence. 2011, i lost my nephew. to a senseless act of gun violence. christopher was just 20 years old. he was a student at old dominion

university in norfolk, virginia. like the beautiful children who lost their lives at sandy hook, he was an amazing young man. his entire life ahead of him. it is a painful thing to see your nephew, your son, or your daughter, to see their blood splattered over walls and couches, however they may have been killed. like countless others, i live the unimaginable suffering of losing a want -- loved one due to gun violence. the pain i still feel in my heart today, even two years later. last week, during the press conference urging the country not to forget the massacre in

newtown, the president was joined by 21 mothers who are fighting for legislation to reduce gun violence. let me tell you, i fully understand their passion. i fully understand their pain. i also fully understand their purpose. because, when you lose a family member like that, you just don't mourn them at their funeral. you mourn them every day of your life. you mourn for the person that they could have been. at for children murdered five years old and six years old, as they were in sandy hook, you mourn every missed birthday , every graduation, every christmas, and every easter.

every milestone missed is a reminder of the life they could have led, had it not been so brutally and violently snatched away. so, you see, we are not only morning what we lost, we are also morning what could have been. ing whate also mourn could have been. it just is not lead to great passion in those family members area did it leads to great passion and those who hear about these incidents. those who were the neighbors, and friends of these children. those who went to church with them. the passion is deep and powerful, and that passion must and will lead to change. .e will not forget

we will fight to keep fighting for gun legislation. i will fight for that legislation until i die. i want to start today by talking about our current fight against the problem of gun trafficking and straw purchasing, which i've been working on for several years. in a bipartisan forum on gun trafficking that i organized last month, you heard from first responders and law enforcement officials who are victims of gun trafficking crimes. it is our brave law-enforcement officers and first responders who find themselves on the wrong end of a gun barrel. i want to share some of their stories with you. lest we never forget. i think we need to constantly -- of ourselves that

these stories so they are printed in the dna of every cell of our brains, as we debate the gun issue. one of these brave men is ted. a firefighter from westminster, new york. he suffered multiple gunshot was when his unit was responding to a fire alarm on christmas eve, three months ago. that fire turned out to be an ambush. it was set by a man named william, a convicted felon and, who served 17 years in prison for killing his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer. despite his history of violence , he convinced his neighbor to 12 gauge shotgun he

used to murder firefighters and injured two others, including the officer. over here, pictures of two firefighters lost their lives that day. , and hisld thomas mentor, mike. , and tot behind a wife your and daughters, and a son. they titled this a reality check. that is the reality. they are no longer with us. they are dead. we also heard from chief joseph lyons. that is in pennsylvania. he talked about the loss of one of his own officers, brad fox. officer fox was directing

traffic when andrew thomas, a convicted felon, swerved into oncoming traffic. when officer fox gave chase, thomas shot and killed him before turning the gun on himself. for some reason, a straw purchaser willingly bought seven handguns, and two rifles for this killer, even though he was a convicted felon. something is awfully wrong with that picture. officer fox was only 34 years old. he was one of our heroes. he was in iraq war veteran who returned as a hero. he left behind a pregnant wife and daughter. that is the reality.

-- brad was like a son to me. chief sur.rd from it involved hundreds of firearms. as a matter of fact, the chief told us that a lot of people who are convicted felons there are looking for ways to illegally make money. instead of going into drug trafficking, they go into drug -- gun trafficking. we neededcerned that some kind of trafficking law so that we might address this gaping loophole. many of these firearms ended up in streets of the bay area and were recovered at crime scenes across san francisco and oakland, including guns in the

possession of armed robbery suspects, folks who are on a roll -- folks who were on parole. one thought into the hands of a convicted felon, and multiple gang members and traffickers. ladies and gentlemen, let's be clear. this problem is everywhere. it is not just sandy hook. it is not just baltimore. it is not just rural georgia. just last week, their war reports of a nether straw purchasing -- another straw purchasing issue in colorado for a convicted felon shot and killed a prison chief and a pizza delivery man. the shooter was on parole after shooting -- serving four years for punching a prison guard in

2008. most americans think the trafficking is a federal crime. i have news for you. it is not. they have no idea that there is no federal law targeting traffickers who commonly use straw purchasers to buy guns for convicted felons and other dangerous criminals who cannot legally buy guns on their own. in congress, we have heard from law enforcement that straw purchasers are -- this is their word -- toothless. they're viewed as nothing more than violations similar to getting a ticket for going 65 miles per hour in a 55 miles per hour zone. those are not my words.

-- i joined my republicans and democrats in february to introduce gun trafficking prevention acts -- prevention act of 2013. this commonsense legislation will explicitly prohibit firearm trafficking, and will make straw purchasing a serious crime, by increasing the maximum penalty to 20 years in prison. i'm grateful to have significant support from law enforcement officials from all over the country. nearly 30 organizations support the bill, including law- enforcement officials throughout the nation. these officials believe our legislation is critical. very critical to combating the flow of firearms.

enjoying a also significant bipartisan support in the house of representatives, thanks to the thoughtful leadership of representatives scott mitchell, pat meehan, and carolyn maloney, who joined me in list -- who joined me. bipartisan sport is growing every day. we now have surpassed 100 cosponsors in the house of representatives. the legislation also has significant bipartisan support in the senate. it was passed by the senate judiciary committee with the .rist sport -- support

this week, the full senate will vote on its critical legislation. then it will be the time for the house to act. i hope the house judiciary committee acts this month to begin the process of marking up legislation so we can vote before summer. i know that we still have a long way to go before the president can sign this legislation into law. .ut, it will be a tough fight but, it will be a fight worth fighting. .e have so much on our side we have common sense, a desperate need, and most importantly, we have the drive and passion of thousands of families who have been

victimized by gun violence. the vast majority of americans should that congress pass legislation to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. i know the president and vice president share this passion for reducing gun violence. for the first time in decades, a white house made preventing gun violence a top priority. just last week, the president held a press conference on this very issue, and reminded our nation that we will never forget those who lost their lives because a gunman decided to pull the trigger. as the president said, "what we are proposing is not radical. it is not taking away anyone's gun rights. it is something that if we are and now we will do it, is the time to turn that heartbreak into something real

." i have been asked whether i support other gun related legislation, and the answer is, i do. for example, i believe background checks is one of the most common sense actions we can take to prevent criminals from getting guns. i think that it would koppelman to our gun trafficking legislation -- i think it would complement our gun trafficking legislation. the anti-trafficking legislation would impose strong new criminal reynold sees -- penalties on those who try to get around the system. for myself, i have chosen to focus primarily on gun trafficking legislation, because it is an issue i can -- i have been working on for several

years. i've worked painstakingly with both democrats and republicans to slowly build a bipartisan coalition behind this bill. i strongly believe that when people understand what this bill does, they will support it wholeheartedly. even the nra has come around over the past several months. there are only two groups who should oppose this bill. let me say that again. there are only two groups who should oppose this bill. criminals, and people who want to buy guns for criminals. if congress can pass legislation, we will have made real substantive reform that will reduce gun violence across our great nation.

we are not done yet. i believe that if we work together, and we work hard, and we focus on our common purpose, our common purpose of protecting our families from gun violence, then we will succeed. no parent, not one, should have to send a child to school, whether it be sandy hook elementary school, or old dominion college, and wonder whether he or she will make it home alive. our country is better than that. we are better than that. inner cities,a's suburbs, and small towns, the murderers take more than 11,000 american lives each year. a death toll more than three times the number of americans who lost their lives during the day long -- decade long war in iraq. the is the reality.

we must make these deaths transformative. we as a nation must help to heal those families have suffered so much. part of the healing process for me, and for countless other families, is to prevent other senseless deaths from gun violence from occurring again. we in the congress of the united states must be vigilant and put party politics and rhetoric aside, and make protecting american families and future generations our priority. this is our watch. this is our watch. to borrowow's -- words from martin luther king, he said, "we must substitute courage for caution, and do what is right -- woman substitute

courage for caution." just one last word. i believe that when i think about the many young people who have died, i think about our children in the sandy hook. i think about the mass shootings that we have heard about and seen on our television sets, and the ones that you have written about. i do believe with all my heart that we survivors do not have the right to be silent. we do not have the right. with that, i will take questions. >> i will moderate the questions. stay up here with us. i'm going to lead off the questions with one that bothers

me. this the politics of issue. with 90% of americans supporting your measure and the background checks, and the fact, aren't there more parents concerned about the lives of their kids then there are leaders of the nra, which by majority, supports these measures. what is the politics that allows the nra to transcend and have a story in "the washington post" that it could be gutted by the national rifle association. how can we reverse it? are we going to lose the opportunity here unless america collectively figures out a way to not pay attention to that kind of thing?

what is to be done? how do you explain it? >> i am so pleased that you will have an opportunity to ask wayne lapierre that question. i cannot answer that question. i am not the nra. i can only speak for my own reality. i do believe with all my heart that when you have 20 children ,urdered, little children simply learning how to read -- getting ready for christmas, and somebody , ies in and murders them

said in my speech, there are certain transformative moments that happen in all of our lives. if that does not cause folks to step back and say we need to begin to look at the way our country is operating, and say that we need to do something about gun violence, i do not know what will. i will be and just to hear with the nra has to say about that. let me say this. having lived as long as i have lived, one of my greatest --cerns is that people arguments go back and forth, and we end up doing nothing. we end up doing absolutely nothing. because, i do believe that when you have these transformative moments, they are pregnant with

opportunity to make a difference. if we do not act in those moments, then things will likely only get worse area did only get worse. -- only get worse. you will not hear me beating up on the nra. i want to work with the nra to bring about meaningful legislation so that we get something done. i want to deal with the bottom line. do we have something, or don't we? the arguments will fade into the universe. the question is, how we accomplish anything? again, great question. i would hand off to mr. lapierre. >> ok. are you ready question mark let

start in the back. identify yourself and your organization. ." peter with "the daily mail one of the biggest issues was operation fast and furious in 2000 guns were straw purchaser new mexico and resulted in the death of 300 new mexicans. -- that was wrong. agrees it wasody wrong. the legislation would address that issue. you talk about these transformative moments. there have been a number of

these transformative moments. a congresswoman was shot in the head. what is different with sandy hook? is it different, or is it we have seen everything back to the movies, when they were doing a crime bill, we saw there was the shooting in scotland in 1995. why would sandy hook be different? why would this be different? >> five-year-old children. i do not know if you all have children, but the idea that you send your child, a five-year- old, to school, and then someone just walks in and murders them, i think that -- every life is precious. knowing thatthing i'me is so much process --

glad you asked that question. i believe that, i wish all legislators could go and do what i did last friday. i try toe things that always do is make sure that i feed my passion. what i mean by that is i stay focused on my job. about a week ago, i called our medical examiner in baltimore. i asked him to come and see an autopsy. i wanted to see an autopsy of someone who had been a victim of

gun violence. after about a week, a case came up that he allowed me to see. because, i wanted to be reminded of how serious this thing was. i had an opportunity to see a young man about the age of my nephew. .ho had been shot in the head i looked at him, a very healthy young man. i watched the autopsy. i do not know if any of you have ever seen an autopsy, it is not a pleasant thing to look at. but, you know what got me? i am so glad we titled this what

we titled it. "reality check." this young man, the day before, was probably sitting and getting prepared for easter. this was a human being. he had plans, who probably had a -- and who and to has a mother and has a father. the reality was that now i am looking at a body. a body that has gone through the autopsy process. we need some reality checks. what it is. i don't know what has to happen

for us to bring good people, and i do believe there are wonderful people, nra people, they are try to do their right thing. people who are concerned about the issue of gun violence, i think they are trying to do the right thing in their judgment. her has to be away for for these two forces to come together to make sense so that folks on how to witness that. can be done. that it must be done. do know what, people say, you have hope that things are going to work out? i believe that we will have -- we will get legislation through. not getause you do every single thing you want, i have learned that in 37 years, you just keep pushing, you keep pushing. the difference is, we

are talking about small children. something that causes you to step back when you witness that and you see that, and you hear about that, and then you come home and look at your small child, your grandchild, and think, if they were in that position. perhaps again, that would be a good question to ask. alicia, "associated press." the lingo proposed by the nra would increase the debtor torry -- is that something you would except? >> that would make it water down.

, again,hope that according to what i've read in ,the post congo -- the post apparently it is a draft. i would hope that our friends in the nra would reconsider that. let me tell you something, one of the things that i work hard on every day of my life is that i want to be effective in fixing -- and efficient in what i do. we have got laws that are meant are convicted who felons from getting guns. it seems logical to me, if we want to be effective and efficient, we would make sure -- that isopholes

just logical. mr. lapierre said something not very long ago when he was talking about this bill. i want to quote. he said, "we are working on to beef up penalties on straw purchaser's and illegal trafficking, which we were prosecuted. " we are 5000 families. we want to make people safe. as with the nra does every day. i didn't say that. the nra said that. what i'm saying is that if that is the case, then we ought to be

able to come together to create some common sense legislation that is effective and efficient. we will bel that able to do that. we're just going to have to wait and see. >> i was wondering if you could tell us about that legislation that would put restrictions on ammunitions and magazines. thes you know, i think leader of the senate, harry reid, has said that he doesn't know whether he has the votes to do -- to get that regularization -- to get that

passed. he has opened the door for that to be put forth as an amendment. i personally would love to see limits on magazine clips. an assault weapons. -- and assault weapons. at the same time, i want to make sure that we get something done. i want to go back to what i said earlier. we can argue this, and argue that, and do nothing. do absolutely nothing. i think we need to be careful with that. , to her credit, senator feinstein has done a phenomenal job. i have tremendous an h in -- admiration for her. leader happening is that

reid has made a determination, and we will have to see how that goes. >> in the back. just a quick question. you said that you wanted to work with the nra. mr. lapierre has made it clear in the past that they made the point today that a proposal to congress, even recommendations to the state on how to change laws about armed guards on campuses, your perspective on armed guards? >> i don't have any more guns in schools is necessarily the answer. with all do respect, i think any jurisdiction that wants to take care of their kids in that way, and their students, i think it may not be

a bad proposal. we do not know all the details. i assume is what he will be be talking about in the next few minutes. keep in mind him a gun violence is not restricted to schools. , movie got malls theaters, in my neighborhood i lived, i see this. --hink we have to look much schools are one thing, but we have to look more at a general scope and try to address it in a more general way. i have an error in my district, howard county, which has guards in schools. in talking to the guards, they tell me, the greatest

benefit is intelligence. to be able to talk to the kids, to learn what might be going on , to prevent fights and things of that nature. but, i wouldn't throw that suggestion out of the window. just as i would not want him to toss the things that we are trying to address here out the window. i think that there is a way that we can accomplish some good things, and i would hope that they would take a look at these proposals and not do things to water them down. >> back to the front. >> thank you. -- goingthe mexican

back to what robert said about high support for proposals like universal background checks. i was thinking, it is more than andmembers of the house, the fact that you pass only -- you have only 20% of the supporters, the congress is in part responsible. what we here lately is blaming the nra. when there is high support among the people in this country for legislation, would you say that congress is not being effective

and efficient in the gun issue? >> let me be clear. have 100 cosponsors. it is a law. most legislation may not even have 1/5 of what that is. the mirror number of car sponsors -- cosponsors does not necessarily equal the number of people who support the legislation. not everybody cosponsors legislation. i want to be really clear on that. as ank that we have at this a duty to look problem very carefully. i think that we have a responsibility to try to work with each other to come up with

meaningful legislation so that we do not have situations like sandy hook, like those that are happening in our areas every day. one of the things about this legislation, i want you to understand this, a lot of people don't realize how important is trafficking issue is. , we have casesng where folks are convicted felons and they are trying to figure out how to make money. they are also trying to figure out how to supply their gang members with guns. , a lot of cases, where a convicted felon gets somebody to straw purchaser guns. 2.5lady bought 64 guns in

months, then set -- vincent those guns -- then sent those guns to oakland, which were sold and distributed, and the next thing you know, those guns were showing up at crime scenes. that is happening all over the country. according to the testimony that we have received, gun trafficking has become one of the crimes du jour. the problem is that we do not have the necessary dedicated drug gun trafficking federal statutes to close that toe. it is a big cold. -- it is a big hole. .e hear about these buybacks you see the piles of guns, only

to find that maybe a year later, there is another buyback. the guns that constantly are flowing into areas all over our country. i think that again, we want to we do everything in our power to stop that. whoink, as i said, members read the bill and looked at it carefully, they would understand there are only two people who would be against this. the criminal come in the person who wants to buy the gun for the criminal. i do not know who else would be against it. let's give you a workout today. >> things for doing this today. said youring, you spoke to many congressmen about

this issue. what keeps coming up? can you generalize the resistance is to your proposals -- the resistance to your proposals? i am not -- i cannot say one particular thing. the know that i have seen to ourns with regard republican cosponsors. , and i'mhat the nra not telling you anything you do not already know, has put forth significant efforts to put forth their position. i'm sure that people take into consideration.

you have other people who are certainly looking at their elections, reelections. i believe that there is a way, when you are dealing with something of this significance, thesomething that can bring kind of pain and suffering that comes out of this issue, that we ought to be able to in someway convince our constituents that what we we are doing is on the side of what is right. our constituents are pretty much convinced already. you talk to gun owners who say they believe that there should be background checks. 90%. who have guns,

feeling strongly about some of these measures. some way -- the role that mayor bloomberg has weight is significant and trying a push.folks to remind them that it is ok to come up with feasible ways to address a problem, and at the same time, making it clear that you are not trying to take the gone away,ollector's or the housewife who wants to make sure that she is protected in her home. balance that out, to make sure that people understand, i think you are not trying to take the gun away, but you want to legislate so that

things like sandy hook do not happen. i think that balance is difficult. is "the baltimore sun" still here? >> are you frustrated by the fact that democrats in the senate have not moved this? are you concerned the momentum is living away? -- the momentum is slipping away? life is a great question. -- >> that is a great question. i'm not frustrated. everything has its moment. i think that the case is being -- keep in mind, we were at a

point where we were not able to have this discussion a year or so ago. we would not even be having this discussion. i may not even be invited to the press corps to speak. but here we are. this is about moving the ball up the court. i don't know whether we will score two points, or three points, or more. but i believe that we will accomplish something. it may be that we lay the foundation in this congress to do even more in the next congress. but, the fact is, the passion ,hat comes out of those parents french sandy hook, the passion -- from sandy hook, from baltimore, love suffered so

much gun violence, the passion that comes to me and others will not die. that is the reality. i do not get frustrated because my concern about getting frustrated is that a lot of times, frustration, you get some tied up you get so much in the frustration, it you forget the price. when i think about that young man who is laying there dead, ear,a bullet hole in his shut out the side of his head, that is my passion. , iflieve that he would say he could speak, cummings, you do

not have the right to remain silent. you must never be so frustrated that you give up. by the way, there is one thing we need to keep in mind. a lot of folks who who had a really never suffer from gun violence, -- a lot of folks, they tend to acting out ofre paying. they have turned their pain into passion to carry out a purpose. it may take years to achieve that purpose. but, you still keep pushing on. by the way, they not doing it for their kids. their kids are gone. doing it so that it is a happened to other children. -- so it does not

happen to other folks, like the teachers in sandy hook. ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. -- thankconclude, iq you. we have been yelled at for going too long sometimes. on behalf of the national press club, and for what you have done for america today, we like to present you with its raditional -- >> thank you. >> we are now adjourned. >> moron gun control tonight on c-span -- more on gun control tonight. it calls for arming teachers. the is tonight at 8:00 eastern.

we will follow that with your calls and tweets on the issue. a pentagon spokesperson talked about the potential threat from north korea. he also said chuck hagel plans to give back a portion of his salary in response to the furloughs facing employees. >> good afternoon. just a brief announcement. if you do not already know, this is sexual assault awareness month. the secretary will be issuing a videotaped message, and he will also issue a written statement. with that, i will turn it over to you. >> could you sort out some of in record to north korea's peninsula?

could you explain what company is transiting that? also, that radar. what is happening with that? >> there is a lot of reporting surrounding all of this. sbx radar.t with the seas undergoing scheduled trials. they are undergoing -- they're undergoing semiannual system checks. decisions about further deployments have not been made to this point. on the decatur and the mccain, they have arrived at predetermined positions in the western pacific, where they will

be poised to respond to any missile threats to our allies or our territory. as you know, our pacom commander regularly deploys a mix of assets in the region to respond to missile threats, and we're cognizant of the missile threats that are always there for north korea. >> on the point about the decatur that i wanted to press you on was, as i understand it, it was en route from the fifth fleet aor to its homeport. is it then being held up for this mission you just described? or does it just happen to be passing through? >> it's arrived at a predetermined location in the western pacific to perform a missile defense mission. i would note that there was some reporting yesterday that our missile-guided -- our guided missile destroyers would be stationed off the north korean coast. let me make it clear that that's incorrect, but these ships are in the western pacific. >> so was that a yes to my question? i mean, is it -- is it just -- it's being -- being remissioned then or -- it's not being -- it's being held within that aor to perform this mission instead of going home? >> it's going to be -- it's going to be at this location in the western pacific to perform a missile defense mission as

assigned by our combatant commander. justin? >> and just to follow on that, neither of those are part of foal eagle, correct? >> that's correct. >> okay. and how far can you say are they off the peninsula? if you don't want to say that they're off the north korean coast, what, how do we best describe their location, then? because the pacific is pretty big, as you know. >> your geography skills are incredible, justin. i don't mean to be unspecific, but we don't normally talk about the precise locations of our ships. but i'm trying to give you a general sense of where they are and where they aren't. we regularly conduct missile defense missions, sea-based and land-based, in the asia-pacific region. that's for obvious reasons. and we will continue to perform these missions regardless of what tensions may or may not be at a given time. >> on the sea-based radar, you said it's a systems check. is it available to track a missile should there be a launch? is it part of the missile defense system right now? or is it just -- is this kind of fixing it? >> i'm not going to get into further details on the sbx. my colleagues elsewhere can probably assist you with the

technical details on this particular platform, but it is undergoing a semi-annual systems check and is underway for trials. jenny? >> so you said you regularly conduct missile defense missions. >> sure. >> does that mean the decatur and mccain are on a regular defense missile mission? >> i'm simply saying that they are in a missile defense mission right now. missile defense is an important priority for us in the asia- pacific and elsewhere. and we are postured to protect our allies' and our own interests in this region and other regions of the world. i'm not going to get into the specifics of these missions, except to say that they are part of the constellation of missile defense capabilities that are available to our combatant commander in the pacific. >> are those the only two guided missile destroyers that are potentially available at the moment? or are there other ones that we don't know about that might be en route or are in the region? >> i'm really going to leave it here. i'm really not going to discuss the mix of our assets, sea- or land-based, in the region, but i did want to clarify some of the reporting that i saw yesterday. >> fitzgerald. my understanding is -- >> pardon me? the fitzgerald?

>> yeah, aegis class guided missile destroyer. my understanding was it was off the coast -- off the korean peninsula. is that not the case? >> let me get you some details on the fitzgerald. >> if the north korean is a seriously provocative threat to the united states, is there any -- do you have any plan to

preemptive strike north korea? >> let me be very clear that the united states position is the -- we want peace and stability on the korean peninsula. for over 60 years, we've had an alliance with south korea, and top priority of that alliance is to ensure peace and stability on the peninsula and in the region. we hope to preserve peace and stability, and we hope that others seek to do the same. tom? >> george, the counter- provocation agreement between u.s. forces korea and the rok military -- [inaudible] -- announced with quite a bit of unusual fanfare, i'm a little confused. is that counter-provocation against the north, or is it to control south korean overly aggressive escalation, or both? >> the new counter-provocation plan formalizes bilateral consultations to coordinate efforts between the united

states and the republic of korea to respond to dprk provocations. the plan is led by the republic of korea joint chiefs of staff and is supported by our usfk commander, who as you know wears three hats -- the u.s. hat, the combined forces command hat, and the u.n. hat. and this plan improves our combined readiness posture and allows immediate and decisive response to any north korean provocation. >> so just to follow up if i might, would it be fair to assume then that, you know, some of the previous provocations were not met with robust responses by the south. that was politically unpopular. the artillery shelling of the island was kind of a paltry response. when the warship was sank, nothing was done. does this counter-provocation deal mean that if north korea does this type of provocation short of war, that they should expect a response? >> i'm not going to speculate on what we may or may not do in the context of a future north korean provocation such as the

ones that you describe or talk about the specifics of the plan, which is classified. but we do have options at our disposal to respond effectively to any north korean provocation. we have plans in place with our south korean allies, and naturally we hope never have to put any of these plans into place. the goal -- let me reiterate -- is to protect peace and stability on the peninsula. >> george, considering the mutual defense treaty that exists between china and north korea, have there been -- have there been any communications between this building -- any kind of consultation between this building and the chinese military? >> there, to my knowledge, has not been any form of consultation between the department of defense and the chinese military to this point. if that changes, i will certainly let you know. >> can i follow on china? there are some reports out of russia today that china has started mobilizing military

forces around the korean peninsula, around -- closer -- moving forces closer to its border with north korea. have you heard of any unusual chinese military movements in the region? >> i've seen those reports, but i would refer you to the chinese military or the chinese government for comment. >> so you don't -- you have or you haven't heard about that kind of stuff? >> i've seen press reporting. >> you haven't seen anything official on it? >> i have not seen anything beyond the press reporting that i could talk about, and i would refer you to the government of china. mathieu? >> the u.s. forces korea website has been offline for a few hours now. do you have any idea -- i mean, what's the reason for that? is it malfunction or a cyber attack or -- >> my understanding at this point is that it's a simple hardware problem. if that changes, we'll let you know. usfk is obviously in a good

position to address that particular issue. courtney? >> can we go back to the sbx radar? because i'm a little confused about -- is -- so it has nothing to do with this other -- the other two ships that are there on these predetermined missile defense? it is no way involved in any kind of north korea deterrence or -- >> at this stage, it's undergoing sea trials, period. >> but what does that mean? >> no decisions have been made about its future deployments. >> so -- okay. sea- but when you say trials -- because it's not like this is the first time that the sbx has been underway. i mean, it's -- it's -- so what

does that mean? is that like a normal exercise? and it has nothing at all to do with the -- what we've all been talking about with korea? or is it incorrect to tie the sbx -- this deployment or this -- >> i believe it's incorrect to tie the sbx at this point to what's happening on the korean peninsula right now. >> and then with respect to the decatur again, just to make sure that we're all on the same page here, this was -- when you say it was a predetermined location, it was -- they were not rerouted in any way? because i think there was some reporting out there that they were on their way back home. that's not correct? >> that's what bob i think was asking. i'm not going to comment on the specifics here. i'm merely saying that the decatur is now deployed to a predetermined location in the western pacific to support missile defense missions. >> because that's not -- i mean, if there's a ship that's heading home, that's not something that is not commentable from the podium. i mean, that's something that we're -- that we're frequently told about, that their

deployment is ending and they're heading back home. so why you can't specifically just clear up the reporting out there? >> it's not unusual sometimes for us to deploy and redeploy assets. just because a ship -- whatever ship it may be -- is scheduled to return home, sometimes they're redeployed. that's what we do. we're -- >> tell us if that's the case here or not. >> yeah. >> so is that the case, that this -- in fact, they were supposed to be going back home and they were rerouted or they were stopped for a certain amount of time? >> let me come back to you on that, just to make sure i'm clear -- [inaudible] -- tony? >> on missile defense -- just to clarify -- the mccain and the decatur, if they were -- they're in the region. they would have to have a capability to protect south korea from north korean missile salvos. is that correct? that would be more land-based u.s. patriot thaad missiles in south korea? those would -- the ships would more provide for regional missile defense against other locations? >> we have a range of assets, a constellation of capabilities in the asia-pacific region that can help defend against missile threats from north korea. and you're absolutely correct -- those assets also help protect our own interests, our own troops in the region, and other allies, to include japan. so while i wouldn't get into the specifics of these particular missions, you're absolutely correct that we have a full range of land- and sea-based capabilities to help respond to missile threats, including those from north korea. >> and to follow-up, too. the public is most acutely aware of the artillery threats from north korea -- they've got, like, 13,000 within 90 kilometers of seoul, is the statistic.

what capabilities does the united states and republic of korea have to counter that very immediate threat? can you give any feel for that? >> you're talking about the north korean military positions on their side -- their artillery? >> roughly. i mean, counter -- do we have counter-battery weaponry or firefighter locations? i mean, how would we counter this massive barrage if, in fact, god forbid, it happens? anyell, we don't have indication that that's imminent. and let me clear about that. i think we spoke to that yesterday as a government. but make no mistake about it, we have the assets available inside south korea and elsewhere to help defend against the kinds of situations that you just described.

i'm not going to get into the specifics of where our assets are in south korea or elsewhere, but we stand ready to defend south korea from external threats wherever they may originate. >> it's hard to determine what assets were a part of the military exercises with south korea and what are actually being moved. has there been any surge in u.s. military assets due to the latest north korean threat? >> we are keenly aware of the recent provocations by north korea. and we have forces postured in the region to respond to potential threats from north korea. and that's what we do on a regular basis. we're also acutely aware of the recent provocations, and we will take appropriate measures -- and not all of which i will describe from this podium -- to ensure that we have the assets in place to defend south korea, our own forces in the region, and our allies. >> you will take? so you haven't surged any assets to this point? >> we have a range of assets that have been deployed and that could be deployed to ensure that we have adequate resources in the region to provide for

defense of south korea and our own personnel and interests. that's what we do on a regular basis. we respond to different circumstances, different threats, not just in the asia- pacific, but elsewhere in the world. and that's what we do as a united states military. we ensure that we have the diversity of assets available to respond. and that's what we're doing now, and that's what we'll continue to do. >> just to -- just to clarify on that point -- [inaudible] -- an important one, would you characterize our current posture in that region as within the range of our -- of the u.s. posture in past years, in recent years -- is this still within that range? you know, obviously, the threats and the concerns ebb and flow from time to time with north korea, but are we within -- still within that range? or we -- [inaudible] -- gone -- gone out of that range? >> well, i don't quite know how to define your range versus my

range versus courtney's range versus bob's range. but what i can tell you is that our response and the mix of assets we have applied to our responses is prudent, logical and measured. we are in the midst right now of -- of very important annual exercises that we regularly conduct with the south koreans, and these exercises are about alliance assurance. they're, first and foremost, about showing the south koreans and showing our other allies in the region, including the japanese, that we are ready to defend them in the wake of threats. julian? >> i wonder if you could talk a little bit about the -- the -- more about the north korea reactor. is that a kind of -- does this building see that as a provocation that requires some sort of response? or does it depend on not just the words that they say, but what -- what -- what comes out of that action? >> well, this is relatively late-breaking news, julian, this recent announcement that it restart its nuclear facilities. i would note that the announcement clearly contradicts north korea's own commitments and violates north korea's international obligations. there really is a choice, i

think, for north korea. it can abide by its international obligations, we hope it does, or it pursue a different path. and we think that the right path is one of peace and stability on the korean peninsula. let me be clear -- north korea must abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons and abide by its international commitments. the united states seeks the complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization through authentic and credible negotiations. and i think that the united states and our international

partners share that goal. yes? someorge, we talked about of the heavy bomber flights and some of the ship deployments in response to the north korean sort of actions, but there hasn't been any -- any discussions as far as unmanned assets, particularly the global hawks based in guam being used over the peninsula. is there a particular reason why those -- those assets haven't been used yet? and if so, why? >> typically, our isr missions around the world are classified. so i wouldn't comment one way the other on whether or not isr assets have been deployed in the asia-pacific. >> on the f-22 deployments, while those raptors were deployed, was the raptor fleet operating under any other flight

restrictions that had been in place for months before? >> for the specifics on that, i'll have to come back to you. i'm not aware of any flight restrictions they were flying under, but if that changes, i'll let you know. okay. marcus? >> are they still on display, by the way? >> yes. >> not flying? >> they're not flying. >> can you preview the secretary's speech tomorrow at ndu and talk a little bit -- >> i don't want to preempt the secretary of defense. >> but why did -- why did he decide to hold his first major policy speech there? >> well, this is a very important speech. i think the secretary looks forward to going to ndu. it is a very important dod facility. this is a secretary who likes to speak to his own workforce, particularly men and women in uniform. and i think that's one of several reasons why he chose ndu.

as for the content of the speech, i'll leave that to him. he's still using the blue pen to mark it up a little bit. craig? >> george, speaking of sexual assault month -- apologies if i missed it -- but what was the outcome of those two reviews the secretary asked for regarding the aviano sexual assault prosecutions? >> it's a good question, craig. let me make clear that secretary hagel is deeply committed to efforts to prevent sexual assault in all forms in the united states military and to holding those accountable who perpetrate this crime. the two reviews that he ordered are winding their way to completion. they're not yet at the point of completion. on the so-called article 60 review, he has been briefed on recommendations by the general

counsel and will consider those recommendations in the coming days. and when i have something to share on his final decisions, i'll let you know. on the review that he ordered secretary donley to conduct, that's also winding its way to completion but is not yet complete. >> the air force -- they handed it over a couple of weeks ago -- [inaudible] -- is that where it stands? i mean, the air force has completed donley completed his end of things -- >> that's my understanding. barbara? a can we step back on -- little bit of the bigger picture on north korea? because i'm confused. you continue to talk about these deployments in terms of being routine, prudent, logical, measured, and you also -- the administration talks on the one hand about the routineness of it all and on the other hand talks about provocation. so which is it? are we in a -- is this all

routine? or are we in a period of north korean provocation that we are compelled to respond to? i'm -- i see both messages coming out of here, and i don't know which one is which. >> well, i'm not in the business of messaging, i'm in the business of facts. and the facts are that we have recently conducted military exercises with our south korean allies. the north koreans -- even before those exercises started -- had undertaken provocative steps, and they've conducted underground nuclear tests, they've conducted missile tests outside their international obligations. so they have a track record now over the past few months of provocative behavior. we are in the business of ensuring our south korean allies that we will help defend them in the face of threats. so i don't think it's a contradiction. i think that north koreans have engaged in certain actions and have said things that are provocative. we are looking for the temperature to be taken down on the korean peninsula.

>> the missile defense deployments that you've spoken about, do you believe that the north koreans are headed toward more missile launches, in particular your concerns about their road mobile systems at this point? and do you think it's that? do you think it's long range? what do you think -- what has led you to undertake these missile defense moves? >> we are concerned about the growing capabilities of north korea and its continued investment in missile technologies that violate its international commitments. it is our responsibility -- the department of defense -- to ensure that we have a range of assets of our own to help respond in the face of those threats. not going to comment on intelligence matters, barbara, about what we think the north koreans may or may not do in the future, but we can't rule out the possibility, obviously, that they may conduct some kind of test or engage in some kind provocative behavior that would cause problems. we hope that doesn't happen, but if history's any guide, it could. so we merely need to be ready

to respond, and that's our goal. a couple more questions? >> george, can i ask you to speak more to the new junior enlisted meetings that the secretary is having? >> uh-huh. >> what specific information is he getting from them that he's not getting from his senior enlisted advisers? and what is he doing to sort of put that into context? >> this secretary of defense is interested from hearing from a full range of personnel across the department, from senior level officials on the civilian military side to junior enlisted to senior enlisted, to folks who are deployed in afghanistan, to others who are here, and, of course, the dod civilians who have been affected in particular by furloughs and so forth. the secretary's lunch last thursday was, i think, extremely informative for him. enlistedfrom junior troops from all services, and they shared their insights into why they got into the military and what the military has brought them, some of the challenges they have faced personally and professionally. he, i think, heard from some servicemembers in the junior enlisted ranks who had some very compelling and quite difficult personal stories, who chose the military as a career because it

helped them get out of some other deeply problematic personal situations. militaryose the because they thought it would be a good career. i think he values that insight. and he took notes and pledged to get back to them. and that's something that he looks forward to continuing to do, not just with junior enlisted members, but he's someone who listens carefully, takes everyone's opinion into account. i've heard that personally. he's not looking just for the advice of people like me who sit in the senior ranks of the pentagon, but he's looking to hear from troops in afghanistan and elsewhere. similaroks forward to settings in the future and, in particular, to holding regular discussions with junior enlisted. >> i've read the pentagon's position paper, but i wonder if you could give some more context on the fort hood purple heart issue. why is the pentagon pushing back on this so hard? and following major hasan's trial, would the pentagon be open then to looking again at this issue and perhaps awarding the purple heart? >> i understand that this has been an issue of some debate. i'm -- in the midst of a pending trial, not going to get

into that debate. the department's position has been clear and hasn't changed thus far. but on specifics, i'd refer you to the army. >> but what is their position? what is the rationale for -- for opposing this legislation? >> opposing the legislation? >> the bill that's been proposed -- >> right, well, i'm not going to -- >> -- to award the purple hearts. >> -- comment on legislative proposals. i'm simply saying, chris, that our position at this date has not changed. >> but just to follow up on that, okay, the -- the position paper not only makes the case that this has to do with the trial, but says that awarding purple hearts in this case would affect the purple heart

itself and the people who have received it before. so that's something very different than just one case. and i'm wondering, what is the rationale behind that? and what specifically does the pentagon see as differences between this attack and, say, the purple hearts that were awarded to people in this building following 9/11? >> i understand this debate. i've seen press reports on the position paper that you mentioned. but i think the army is in the best position to address this matter. >> this is a dod matter, not specific -- >> i understand.

but i -- look, this is a matter that's pending before a court. intoimply not going to get it. >> is the position paper dod or army? i'm not familiar with it. >> i, frankly, haven't read through it myself. i mean, i -- so i can't -- i would check with the army. >> is it -- is it a dod or is it an army -- >> i -- i would refer you to the army. the army really is the best place to go for comment on this particular issue. one last question. stephanie? >> on furloughs, when do you expect to have more information about who will be exempt? >> so we are working through all the analytics on the numbers of

civilian employees who we expect, regrettably, to have to furlough in the coming weeks -- including me. and i don't know that we've arrived at a specific number yet, but there are going to be categories of exempt personnel -- civilian personnel in the war zones. there are foreign nationals, for instance, who we employ overseas -- because of status-of-forces agreements, we will be obliged to pay them and not furlough them. and there are other categories. we have not completed the final tally, though. but we expect the vast majority of civilians -- at least at this point -- to be subject to furlough. >> but one of those things that you guys always say in this building is that there's so much uncertainty surrounding the budget. and it seems like this would be one area where you could provide some certainty to some of these civilian employees who don't know what their situation [inaudible] within a matter of weeks, we're talking. so you're saying you will tell them, like, right before the notices go out whether they're exempt or not? >> well, first, let me reiterate that we have changed our furlough policy, which, hopefully, gives some relief to our civilian workforce. we've gone from up to 22 days to up to 14 days. and we are obliged to give adequate notice to our civilian employees as to whether or not they're going to be furloughed or not. this is not something that you

get a notice one day and a furlough the next. so we understand that we need to take great care with our civilian workforce. this has been a troubling time for them and for our uniformed employees, too, for other reasons, even though they're exempt from furlough. so we will take the steps that are required to communicate effectively, and that really falls in large part on me, as the assistant to the secretary of defense for public affairs in this department. and we will commit to communicating on a regular basis with our civilian employees on their particular situation and our policies overall.

>> george, can i ask you one thing about furloughs? sometime ago, ash carter told congress that he was going to give up the portion of his salary that would have been affected by furloughs in order to sort of stand in solidarity with the rest of the civilian workforce here. have any other senior officials, including the secretary, announced any plans to do anything similar to follow dr. carter's example? >> i had a discussion shortly after he took office with the secretary, and he will voluntarily subject part of his salary to furlough levels, even though he's not required. >> >> he has committed to do that. that's right. i'm not going to speak for other senior officials, but i feel compelled to at least let you know that the secretary plans to subject his pay to furlough levels, even though he's not required to, because he is a presidentially appointed, senate-confirmed official in this department. >> to be very clear, that's -- so now that's 14 -- i just want to be really clear -- 14 days, right? i mean, that's what everyone >> well, up to -- up to 14 days. i haven't chatted with him about the -- >> it's not 22 anymore. >> it's not 22, right. >> so it's up to 14 days. >> i wouldn't -- i'm subject to 14 days. i wouldn't go to 22. i'm -- i like to think of myself as somewhat charitable, but -- >> how does -- how does secretary hagel and [deputy] secretary carter, how do they exactly give that money back to the federal government?

what is it that they will have to do, write a check to the treasury or -- >> my understanding is -- and i'm not the accountant expert here -- but my understanding is that there is a legal way to actually write a check, if you will, back to the u.s. treasury. yep. all right. thank you, everyone. attomorrow morning, a look the work of the gang of eight senators working on immigration legislation. our guest is alan gome -- gomer -- gomez. we will talk with doris meissner. lisa margonelli.

live with ufo -- live with your phone calls at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> she was out there in a way that respectable women did not do. this is a new era. this is the time when the women's movement is under way and, someone like julia tyler fits into a certain extent. she is very conservative in some ways. in terms of breaking through the traditional way a woman should behave, she is doing it in a way other women are not at that time. >> our conversation with historians is now available on our web site. >> john kerry today said north korea's recent talk of going to war is reckless. speaking in washington, secretary kerry said the u.s. is

committed to defending south korea and japan from potential threats. >> good afternoon. it is a pleasure to welcome the foreign minister here today in washington. it is his first visit here to washington, and my first visit with him as secretary of state. we are both delighted to start off this way. two very close friends, countries that have traveled a very interesting journey together for 60 years now. we celebrate this alliance. for decades, the united states and the republic of south, the republic of korea have worked side-by-side as allied. we have stood up to a wide range of challenges over that time frame, not just in the asia-pacific, but in other parts of the world as well. when you look back at our common commitment to democracy, to human rights and rule of law, it is no wonder that we have been such natural partners. our alliance, which is in this moment of its 68 anniversary celebration -- 60th anniversary celebration remains critical in asia and it is a linchpin of

peace and stability in the region. the united states is completely committed to deepening this relationship in the years ahead. that is one of the reasons i will be visiting seoul next week. and the president of korea, of the republic of korea, will be here to meet with president obama in early may. today, we discussed all the issues that you would imagine we would, and even more. we covered a great deal. but i will start with north korea. we heard an extraordinary amount of unacceptable rhetoric from the north korean government in the last days. let me be perfectly clear here today. the united states will defend and protect ourselves and our treaty allies, the republic of korea. alsooreign minister and i think it is important to stay absolutely focused on our shared goal of a peaceful

peninsula, free of nuclear weapons. and we agree that improved relations between north and south would ultimately help us toward that goal. that is a stated goal of the new president of the republic of korea, and we look forward to working with her to achieve that goal. we also discussed our collaboration on global security issues. south korea has done great work on the un security council helping to curb civilian casualties in combat zones. and they have done that work not just in the far east, but around the world. we are also grateful for south korea's continued commitment to reducing iranian oil imports. this has not been easy. it is at a cost to their economy. it is difficult. but they have played their role and done their part in helping to have an impact on trying to change the behavior of iran. iran knows exactly what it needs to do in order to address international concerns about its nuclear program.

it can start doing so next weekend in al-madadi at the p-5 plus one talks. workso discussed ways to more closely on the humanitarian crisis in syria. and i thanked the republic of korea for their support on humanitarian concerns in that area. we also shared an initiative on sub-saharan africa, and we thank them for that. in terms of bilateral issues, the foreign minister and died both want to promote the smooth implementation of u.s.-korea free trade agreement. this agreement is good for both countries and it will strengthen our broad economic ties. it will spur growth. it will help to create jobs in both countries and regions. we also had a good discussion on the bilateral civilian

nuclear agreement. we have a long record of close collaboration on this issue. we are committed to fighting -- finding a workable, and expeditious way forward. finally, we are also both deeply concerned about addressing the problem of climate change. we discussed that. we will have further discussions when i go to seoul next week. we both support clean energy balad. will be looking for ways to work closely -- energy development. we will begin looking for ways to work closely together as we look at the issues of climate change over the course of the next few years. it was a very productive meeting. i hope, the first of many in the years ahead. mr. minister, i look forward to seeing you again in a very short timeframe. and i thank you for your commitment in this important partnership.

and i thank you for coming here today to prepare for the import

meetings of our leaders in early may. thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon. i wish to thank secretary kerry for his invitation. we had an excellent meeting today. we discussed a wide range of key issues, including our reliance -- our alliance, north korea, and our agenda. this year marks the 60th anniversary of the caribbean- u.s. allies put in korea, 60 years symbolizes -- the korean- u.s. alliance. in korea, 60 years symbolizes the arrival of wisdom. in this regard, we share the view that the visit in may for president park, which will be your very first overseas visit as head of state, will be to bring our lines to a new height. the secretary perry and i pledged to make every effort to ensure -- secretary kerry and i pledge to make every effort to ensure the summit is a success. we discussed the situation on the korean peninsula, including north korea's nuclear testing as well as the series of threats from the north. we need to further strengthen credible and robust deterrence. in particular, the secretary and i discussed the progress made with the standard deterrence and the provocation plan. i reaffirmed my government's strong commitment to work closely with the united states on north korean policy. both secretary kerry and i agreed that north korea should abandon its nuclear ambitions and rhetoric. we also agreed to collaborate to ensure full implementation of the un's secret council resolution 1324.

i also reiterated my government's policy of building trust. i also emphasized that president park's new policy to promote peace and cooperation in northeast asia is in line with the united states policies asia, and that a mutually reinforce each other. as we reached our anniversary, but secretary perry and i will work -- secretary kerry and i will work toward the smooth implementation of the agreement. strongrnment has a

commitment to open the economy and free trade. strengthene wish to cooperation in the fields of science and technology, space exploration, and change. and finally, i stress the importance of revising the agreement in a timely and mutually beneficial manner. i am pleased with the results of this meeting. i look forward to welcoming secretary kerry in seoul next week. we will continue our commiseration. thank you very much. >> we will take four questions today. >> mr. secretary, thank you very much. i would like to ask you what you think north korea's intentions are. do you think this is just bluster? specifically, the recent threat to restart its nuclear facility. and is there a danger in not taking these threats to seriously, that it might provoke them into actually doing

something? or is there a chance that they could pull back and be ready for diplomacy at some point? mr. foreign minister, the six party talks in the whole process has always relied on china to rein in the north, if you will. it does not seem likely that the north is listening to china in any meaningful way. i'm wondering if you think that this is a safeguard that the parties cannot rely upon any more. as the influence that china has had been used up? >> regarding china's goal, basically, what we thought with the recent reduction of the un security council resolution, china is now very cooperative.

and they have made very clear that they will fully implement the resolution. regarding the six-party talks, actually in this resolution, the six party members and the members of the council also made it clear the six party talks are still a very useful tool to implement and make toward the denuclearization of the north korean nuclear weapons program. we believe the six-party talks should continue. >> i will not speculate on what the intent is or whether there is a strategy or not. the bottom line is very simply that what kim jong-un has been choosing to do is provocative, dangerous, reckless, and the united states will not accept the dprk as a nuclear state.

and i reiterate again, the united states will do what is necessary to defend ourselves and to defend our allies, korean and japan. we are fully prepared and capable of doing so. and i think the dprk understands that. that said, no one takes lightly, least of all the president of the united states, what has been happening. which is precisely why the president made the decision to redeploy missile defense with respect to the united states itself, as well as to take other preparations in the

region, and to send a very clear signal to our allies and the north alike that the united states will defend our allies and that we will not be subject to irrational or reckless provocation. but, and here is an important but, we make it clear and consistently that the united states believes there's a simple way for north korea to rejoin the community of nations and make it clear that they want to pursue a peaceful path. they can come back to the table and join all of those other countries, including their nearest neighbor and partner china. obviously, the shared in u.s. -- the shared nearest neighbor is the republic of korea. but china has an important role to play. and has always maintained a closer relationship to the north than any other country. they have an option. and that option is to enter into negotiations for denuclearization, which is china's policy also appeared and began to focus on the needs

of their people -- a policy also. and begin to focus on the needs of their people, which we have always made clear we will help them with, if they bring it in line with the global requirements. we will proceed thoughtfully and carefully as the president has indicated, but we take nothing for granted. and we are also not indifferent to the meaning of the risks involved. >> do you believe they will restart their nuclear facility as they threaten to do? >> the first of all, if they restart their nuclear facility, that is in direct violation of their international obligations. that in itself would be a breach of international standard requirements. it would be a provocative act.

and completely contrary to the road that we have traveled all these years upon the agreed framework forward. we will have to wait to see what happens with respect to that, but it is a direct violation of international obligations and would be a serious step. >> next up, -- >> the first question goes out to secretary kerry. aret now, a lot of people interested in the negotiation of the u.s.-korea civil nuclear agreement. several people are concerned that if they request low enrichment for people perk -- for peaceful purposes and it is not accepted, that there could be in repressions. do you see progress happening in this area? >> president obama and the united states welcomes south korea's emergence as a peaceful nuclear leader. we're working on a civil nuclear agreement that will build on a

very strong nuclear energy cooperation that we have enjoyed for literally over 50 + years. we see no reason that will not continue. in an agreed upon fashion. the foreign minister and i had a very good discussion about that agreement. we discussed some ideas and i will follow up on those when i visit seoul in about a week. i'm very hopeful. i think the foreign minister shares this hope, that it can be resolved before the visit of president park. but we're quite confident that

this is a relationship that can and will continue in its proper form. >> mr. secretary, in cairo last month, you from afpak $250 million in additional support for the marcey government, following pausch for the morsi government on the promise that he would make more reforms. since then come -- prosecuted more satirists than those involved in crimes. last week in baghdad, you spoke of the need for iraq to more closely monitor flights from iran to syria. the government there has said this weekend that it will do that. have you seen any evidence of that so far? >> with respect to egypt, and we share a very real concern in the obama administration about the direction that egypt is apparently moving in. this is a key moment for egypt. it is really a ticking. -- a tipping point for egypt. and we have been working in the last weeks to try to reach out

to the government, to deal with the imf, to come to an agreement that will allow egypt to begin to transform its economy and improve the lives of its citizens. we share with everybody concerned about the political and economic challenges. and i communicated those concerns with everybody when i was there. i met with the civil society. i met with the opposition. i met and talked to members of the business community. and i met with members of the government. we have put a series of very

real choices to the government of egypt, but in the end, they have to make those choices. the imf is going there this week. there will be discussions with them. but it is only fair to say that president obama and the administration share real concerns about the direction that egypt appears to be moving in. it is our hope that there is still time to be able to turn the corner. but the recent arrests, the violence in the street, the lack of inclusivity with respect to the opposition and public that make a difference to the people of egypt are all of concern today. president obama would make it clear to everybody that the united states went there, as i said, not to support any one

person, and certainly, not to support one party over another, but to try to help the people of egypt to realize the dreams that they expressed in to rehr -- and to rehr square. and the dreams that they have tried to put into reality with the election and through faith in the democratic process. i think there's still time for that to be delivered, but in the and, if the government of egypt and the people of egypt that will make that decision. >> iraq and syria. >> with respect to iraq, i am encouraged that prime minister

maliki responded to our request with respect to the flights from iran into iraqi airspace and then to syria. we are working right now with the government on several things. we are working on the question of how those inspections might take place. we are working on trying to bring the kurds together with the prime minister in a discussion that can bring people back together and get the democratic process back on track. there has been a real breach of that with respect to the kurds. he has not visited baghdad in about two years. they feel they have been pushed away from the governing process. democracy is hard, it is hard work. it is hard work for people who live not experienced it. ever. we all need to work closely together, which is exactly what we are doing now. ministers the prime

will make the right choices to bring people together, to offer people a united election when it takes place in a few weeks and to offer people the democracy that americans invested in so heavily with their treasure of their young men and women who gave their lives and with a large amount of american taxpayer dollars. >> last one today. >> [speaking foreign language] korean peninsula peace process, my question is, do you have any questions -- any plans on suggesting -- for instance, reopening the tourist visits. my question going out to secretary, ever since you remember of the senate, you've always emphasize the importance

of diplomacy and dialogue. this was one of your standing principles. i know you spoke about that kind of principle when dealing with the north koreans. under what circumstances, situation with the united states be prepared to resume dialogue with the north koreans? do you have any specific conditions in mind in order to resume dialogue with the north koreans? if you have any plans on sending a special envoy to north korea? >> first of all, the situation on the korean peninsula -- it is critically important for the u.s. and south korea to enhance its defense capabilities. we will always speak -- we will address, in case of north korean provocation. if north korea decides to give

up its nuclear ambitions and be a member of the international community, we are prepared to resume talks in terms of in place of peace process on the korean peninsula. >> north korea needs to make it clear that they are prepared to have a serious discussion about denuclearization. they know exactly what the goal is. they know exactly what the terms are. we are prepared. president obama has said repeatedly we are prepared to enter into a dialogue and negotiation if they are serious, if they will stop the provocations and engage in serious discussion. we have always said that we

would like to try to resolve the problems of the entire peninsula. that means making peace, but making peace does not involve having a nuclear north and disadvantaged republic of korea to the south. they know very well what the terms are. with respect to the question of the convoy, we have an envoy. the ambassador is appointed already, he is here. if the circumstances are correct to, when north korea issues an indication that it is serious about trying to resolve this issue. i would just say this, i think it is important, we face this danger, at not just to the republic of korea, but a danger to the entire region and the world, of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. and we face in respect to iran. president obama could not have been more clear in respect to both.

his policy is the denuclearization of north korea because that is the only way to begin to end the conflict and create safety in the region. the last thing the world needs is more nuclear nations at the very time the nuclear nations are trying to reduce their current numbers of nuclear weapons and control this danger. we face the question of iran. iran knows very well it has an opportunity this weekend. the iranian people are great people. they have a long history. many times longer than the united states of america. they have an ability to rejoin the community of nations to get out from under this isolation if they will choose this simple ways of proving, as other nations prove, that they have peaceful nuclear energy. it's that simple. it is not complicated. our hope is that that initiative can began in earnest

this weekend where we will have a team prepared to negotiate and in the days ahead, we can reach another -- an understanding that will move us. trying with respect to the korean peninsula to make the world safer. that is what this is about. we have no ambitions there. i think they know that. we want to see a peaceful community of nations trading with each other, working to improve the lives of their citizens and that is in direct contrast to the north, which thousands of political prisoners, tradespeople and the most inhumane way, -- treats people in the most inhumane way, and starves their people. that could not be a bigger choice.