it is now my honor to introduce someone who has shown on wavering commitment to our service men and women and their families and to lead tarnation today with great strength and wisdom -- ladies and gentlemen, help me welcome, our commander in chief, the president of united states of america. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. please be seated, thank you very much. good morning, everybody. i want to thank secretary chuck hagel, not only for the introduction but for your lifetime of service. a sergeant in the army to secretary of defense and always a man who carries with it the memory of friends and fallen heroes from vietnam.

are grateful to you. i want to thank general dempsey, major general linnington, catherine condon has served arlington with extraordinary dedication and will be leaving us but we are so grateful for the work she has done. for chaplain. brainard secretary, and secchi, all our guests and almost of all, to members of our armed services and our veterans, to the families and friends who have fallen who we honor today, to americans from all across the country who will come to pay your respects, i have to say is always a great honor to spend this memorial day with you at this sacred place where we honor our fallen heroes, those who we remember fondly in our memories,

those known only to god. beyond these quiet hills, across that special bridge, is a city of monuments dedicated to visionary leaders and singular moments in the light of our republic. it is here, on this hallowed ground, where we choose to build a monument to a constant thread in the american character, the true that our nation and doors because it has always been home to men and women who were willing to give their all and laid down their lives to preserve and protect this land that we love. that character, that selflessness, beets and the hearts of the very first patriots who died for a democracy they had never known and would never see.

it lived on in the men and women who fought to hold our union together and in those who fought and defended a broad in the beaches of europe to the mountains and jungles of asia. this year, as we mark the 60th anniversary of the end of fighting in korea, would offer a special salute to all those who served and gave their lives in the korean war. over the last decade, we have seen the character of our country again with nearly 7000 americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice on battlefields, in city streets, have a world away. last memorial day, i stood here and spoke about how for the first time in nine years, americans were no longer fighting and dying in iraq. today, a transition is under way in afghanistan and their troops are coming home. fewer americans are making the

ultimate sacrifice in afghanistan and that progress for which we are profoundly grateful. this time next year, we will mark the final memorial day of our or in afghanistan. and so, as i said last week, america stands at a crossroads. even as we turn a page of a decade of conflict, even as we look forward, let us never forget, as we gather here today, that our nation is still at war. it should be self evident. in generations past it was during world war two, millions of americans contributed to the war effort, soldiers like my own grandfather, women like my grandmother the work to the assembly lines. during the vietnam war, just about everybody knew somebody, a

brother, a friend who served in harm's way. today, it is different. perhaps it is a tribute to a remarkable all-volunteer force made up of men and women who stepped forward to serve and do so with extraordinary skill and valor. perhaps it is a testament to our advanced technologies which allows smaller numbers of troops to wield greater and greater power but regardless of the reason, district cannot be ignored that today, most americans are not directly touched by war. as a consequence, not all americans may always see or fully grasp the depth of sacrifice, the profound costs that are made in our name right now as we speak, every day, our

troops and our military families understand this and they mentioned it to me their concern about whether the country fully appreciate what happened. i think about a letter i received from a naval officer, a reservist, who had just returned from a deployment to afghanistan and he wrote me "i am concerned are work in afghanistan is fading from memory." as we keep this conflict alive in the hearts of our people. he is right. as we gather here today at this very moment, more than 60,000 of our fellow americans still serve far from home in afghanistan. they are still going out on patrol, living in spartan forward operating basis, still risking their lives to carry out their mission. when they give their lives, they

are still being laid to rest at cemeteries in quiet corners across our country including here in arlington. capt sarah cohen had a smile that could lead a prayer room and after graduation she became a former black hawk pilot. was just 27 years old when she and four other soldiers were killed by helicopter crashed during a training mission near kanduhar. she was laid to rest in section 60 and she is remembered today by her mother who says she is proud of her daughter's life, proud of her faith and credit per service to our country. -- and proud of her service to our country. [applause]

staff sergeant frank e. phillips came from a military family that and was as tough as they come. combat medic, he was on patrol and afghanistan three weeks ago when his vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb. he was so humble that his parents never know how many lives he had saved the until soldiers started showing up at his funeral from thousands of miles away. last week, he was laid to rest just a few rows over from sarah. staff sgt eric gin was a born leader, a member of the marine corps special operating command. he had served five tours of duty but kept going back because he felt responsible for his teammates and was determined to finish the mission. on may 4, he gave his life after escorting a high-ranking u.s. official to meet with afghan leaders.

later, his family got a letter from a marine who had served two tours with eric. in it, the marine wrote, "there were people who measured their success on how many enemies they killed or how many missions they led. eric bass to success on how many of his friends he brought home and he brought home many including me." eric was laid to rest here arlington just six days ago. [applause] today, we remember their service. today, just steps from where these brave americans lie in the eternal peace, we declare as a proud and grateful nation that their sacrifice will never be forgotten. just as we honor them, we hold

their families close because, for the parents to lose a child, for the husbands and wives to lose a partner, for the children who lose a parent, every loss is devastating. for those of us to bear the solemn responsibility of sending these men and women into harm's way, we know the consequences all too well. i feel it every time i meet a wounded warrior, every time i visit walter reed and every time i grieve with the goldstar family. that is why on this day, we remember our sacred honor -- obligation to those who lay down their lives so we can live our lives, to finish the job is men and women started by keeping our promise to those who wear america's uniform, will give our troops the resources they need, to keep faith with our veterans and their families now and always, to never stop searching for those who have gone missing

or who are held as prisoners of war. on a more basic level, every american can do something even simpler. as we go about our daily lives, we must remember that our countrymen are still serving, still fighting, still putting their lives on the line for all of us. last fall, i received a letter from candy averett of charlotte, north carolina. both of her sons are marines and one served two tours in iraq and her youngest was in afghanistan at the time and he was, in her words, 100% devoted to his deployment and would not have had any other way. reading the letter was clear that she was extraordinarily proud of the life her boys had chosen but she also had a request on behalf of all the

mothers like her -- she said "please don't forget about my child and every other breed and soldier over there will probably choose to serve their country." -- a mother's plea - don't forget on this memorial day and every day. let us be true and meet that promise. let it be our task every single one of us to honor the strength and resolve and the love these brave americans felt for each other and for our country. let us never forget and always remember to be worthy of the sacrifice they make in our name. may god bless the fallen and all those who served and my god bless the united states of america. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, please remain standing for the playing ♪f "taps" and the benediction. ♪

>> let us now join together one last time in prayer on these hallowed grounds for our servicemen. almighty god, continued to endeavor president and all our leaders with energy and insight and send us all of our with strength for the journey that lay ahead, let each and every day remind us to pray for the safety of our brothers and sisters in arms who stand at the tip of the spear for our nation this day for our freedom.

continue to bless this nation, our friends and the flag research. made the spirit of god be near you to defend you within you to refresh you, before you to guide you, behind you to justify you, and above you to bless you for ever more. go in peace brothers and sisters, amen. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain in place until the president has departed and the colors are retired.

♪ ♪

>> toolbar broke, the new america foundation -- tomorrow, the new america foundation.

the recent killing of a british soldier. at noon.rage starts a look at political change in egypt. the carnegie endowment for international peace will hold a discussion. you can watch live coverage on c-span2 beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern. >> there tends to be a whenever onen that the or regimen germans tended to be technically superior. military.the better that is nonsense.

global war is a clash of systems. it is which system can produce the road resolve to project ,ower in the atlantic, pacific the indian ocean, southeast asia. which system can produce the civilian leadership to grade the transportation systems? that is able to produce 96,000 airplanes. rickime pulitzer author atkinson on book tv. the john f. kennedy residential library issued its profile encourage award to gabrielle giffords. she considers a wounded 11 when 2011 when a -- in

gunman opened fire. founded thehusband group which advocates first return gun laws. it is 15 minutes. >> we have a high-powered committee. there are senators and house members and democrats and republicans and some of the greatest warriors. even newspaper editors. who our leader is. she inherited her father's and mother's intelligence, charge, grace and diplomacy. the heart and soul of this

magnificent place and this marvelous award, caroline kennedy. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, al. i thought ken would introduce me. that was so much nicer. thank you all for coming. this always always a special day for my family and the kennedy library to commemorate my father's birthday and under honor those with the virtue -- courage. we also remember his death. our family is still suffering from gun violence. no one should have to lose a husband, a wife, a father, a child to senseless murder.

as our on a rehash on out of that pain and tragedy, we must find the strength to carry on to give meaning to our lives and build a more just world. thatorld that my -- work to carry ondy did for my father. the uniquely courageous woman we honor today remind us all how precious life is and how the human spirit can triumph over hatred and violence. before we begin today's presentation, the ceremony, i would like to salute the first responders of boston. all americans have been inspired by the countless acts of compassion we saw in the violence that struck this city on patriots' day. we pray for those who lost their lives and those were fighting to recover. we give thanks to the the men and women who we gave a path of

hope. my family and this library are proud to call austin home. now we honor a woman who inspires the entire world. gabrielle giffords has turned a personal nightmare into a movement for political change. after an assassination attempt ended her congressional career and left her with grave injuries, she returned to public life as an advocate for new legislation to prevent gun file it. when others would have withdrawn from public life, she has challenged us all to reengage in the political process. and others would have given up hope, she has been unwavering cap politics can solve problems. when others would have look for excuses thomas gabby has inspired action. even before she was injured, gabby was a profile encourage. she was outspoken in her commitment to discourse despite threats over votes she had cast.

since then with the support of her remarkable husband mark, she has not fallen silent. she understands this is not going to be easy and it will not happen quickly, but it is the right thing to do. she perseveres for newtown and aurora in chicago and tucson. her courage has already changed the way we look at guns in this country. our work world spare countless families from the loss caused by violence. as she wrote in the "new york " to do nothing while others are in danger is not the right way. it is my profound honor to present her with the profile encourage award. [applause]

>> thank you, caroline. thank you so much for recognizing my wife's extraordinary courage. to be honored along with people she admires deeply like

isgressman john lewis amazing to gabby. i know that. the determination and the valor my wife displays every single day has redefined "courage"her rich -- for me. was spent a lot of time at the kennedy space center. the only place on the globe from which humans have departed our planet on a trip to the moon and from where i commanded both spay shuttle's discovery and endeavor. is not our first time at the kennedy library in boston, we are glad to be back. we are so sorry for the violence and terror that all of

you have endured. we know what that is like. i saw combat in iraq and kuwait. gabby lived through a mass shooting. we know how violence changes lives. we know that those touched by violence and matters less what you call it. terrorism, war because my lips -- because violence defies -- andraws a line in the sand time before and after. the for with gabby could ride her motorcycle around the foothills of the mountains and speak easily and often to her neighbors. when parentsfore and tucson or martin richard's parents could go to sleep

wondering what wonderful thing their child would say when he woke up the next morning and after. for the victims of boston, the boston marathon bombing who we spend time with today at a rehab center. ed on awhen they gather sunny day of the physical strength and determination watching the runners go by and after when they must find the physical strength and determination necessary for their own recovery. we extend our deepest sympathies to all of you who have endured violence and loss here. but courage for us, it is about doing everything we possibly can to make sure that fewer parents face that loss.

for me, it meant learning more about politics. previously, i handled the spaceflight travel responsibilities in our marriage, and gabby handled the politics. but now we have to do to the politics together. for gabby, her courage is the equivalent of a lunar mission. she has set her sights on a distant rising, a country that will be dramatically safer from gun violence, and she works hard each and every day with physical therapy, speech therapy, and also a little bit of yoga to make sure she is in shape to get there. and there are many doubters, many who think the nra and the rest of the gun lobby is simply too powerful, many who think are deep and patriotic support of the second amendment, which, by the way, gabby and i share, would prevent us from making

progress. many who view the failure of the senate to pass expanded background checks last week have thrown up their hands in anger and disgust. that is fine. our friend jim lovell, the commander of apollo xiii, remembers being amazed. he was amazed in 1961 when president kennedy said we would get to the moon. jim says that he thought that was impossible. then, as many of you know, he flew there, twice. jim says there are people who make things happen, there are people who watch things happens, and there are people who wondered what happened. [laughter] to be successful you need to be a person who makes things happen. gabby giffords is a person who makes things happen. [applause]

gabby has chosen to help inspire, organize, and motivate a nation that is fed up with violence and fed up with congressional inaction, and she has chosen to focus us on coming together and taking concrete steps that will keep families and communities safer. her courage inspires us daily, but i know she is inspired by the courage of those who came before her, those she met today and those hundreds of thousands of americans all across the country who are joining her each and every day, those who are sending checks for $5, $10, that they may need in tough times, to stand shoulder to shoulder with

gabby, those who are talking to their friends at the grocery store and at the water cooler and on playgrounds and saying, we can do better, and i am standing with gabby giffords to get it done. i know she is inspired by the courage, by her friend and staffer gabe zimmerman, who ran toward her and toward danger during the terrible shooting in tucson and lost his life trying to help. president kennedy said, the stories of past courage can teach, they can offer hope, they can provide inspiration, but they cannot supply courage itself. for this, each man or woman, must look into their own soul. gabby's courage is limitless and powerful. we ask for your encourage in

joining us to make sure we achieve our goal of a safer america for all of us. i would like to introduce you to the woman who reminds me each and every day to deny the acceptance of failure, my beautiful wife, gabrielle giffords. [applause] >> thank you to the kennedy family for this award. i appreciate it very much. i believe we all have courage inside. i wish there was more courage in congress. [laughter] sometimes it is hard to express it. i know.

it has been a hard two years for me, but i want to make the world a better place, more than ever. thank you. [applause] thank you. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> on the next washington laws.l, tax-exempt senior white house correspondent will discuss his

new "prisoners of the white house." " begins lifeournal as 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> i begin with integrity because it is essential to what you will become. many of you have a clear path in mind. many of you have no idea where you will end up. a few of you may be surprised where life takes you. i certainly was. what we do it is not but how we do it. i have to start by tweeting this. give me one second. >> i am a professional. when i woke up this morning and started writing my speech i was -- my speech,

thinking about my first month on campus when i was a freshman. the football team went into the season ranked number one preseason. that september when i got here, there was all this excitement on campus. our first game was at wisconsin. we went up there and we lost our first game. there was this crushing disappointment afterwards. i would like you to think of that soaring expectation followed by crushing disappointment as a metaphor as he your next 20 means. what's more stories and -- >> more stores and invites for graduates. robert miller. mrs. leaders including -- business leaders including the

twitter founder. >> at this discussion of the media coverage, the obama andnistration drone program coverage of iraq and afghanistan. this is 1.5 hours. >> i want to welcome you all to the session on independent journalism on war conflict and human rights. i will introduce our extraordinary panel shortly. i am jeff cohen, the founder of the media watch group fair and the center of the park group for independent media at ithaca college. each string at ithaca we give out an annual award for outstanding achievement. named after izzy stone, the izzy award. in 12 days we will do so the

izzy award on the fifth annual winner, the nonprofit news outlet mother jones. it rogues story after story last year, including the now infamous mitt romney, 47% of american voters are moochers undercover video. [applause] some of you know, i spent years as a political pundit on mainstream television, cnn, fox, e. i was outnumbered, out shouted and finally terminated. now i am free. since we are not constrained within the mainstream media, we can freely discuss the elephant in the room. the issue that explains why other countries can have free college education, universal health care, but our country can't afford it. the problem that may be bigger than all other problems in our country because it so

exacerbates all those other problems. it is a problem that martin luther king focused on before he was assassinated 45 years ago this week. it has only gotten worse since. that was the height of the vietnam war. i'm talking about the problem of militarism and perpetual war. king called the united states the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. he said, a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death. we are gathered here today to discuss the unmentionable. the elephant in the room. msnbc host scan yell at fox news host and vice versa, but when the obama administration expanded the hopeless war in afghanistan, the shouting heads on both channels went virtually

silent. as his drone more expanded, there was little shouting on either of those channels or cnn or cbs or abc or so-called public broadcasting, npr and pbs. we can have raging debates in the mainstream media on all sorts of issues like gun control, minimum wage, gay marriage. when the elite of both major parties agree on a military intervention as they so often do, then anyone in the mainstream media who goes out on the limb to question or the knowledge that in the middle of the room there is an oversized creature known of militarism or interventionism. they are likely to disappear faster than you can say phil donahue. i worked with phil donahue. i know a little bit about journalists being silenced for questioning bipartisan military ventures.

i was with him at msnbc in 2002- 2 thousand three when bush was revving up the invasion of iraq with the support of joe biden, john kerry, hillary clinton, harry reid. msnbc terminated us for the crime of jwi. that is journalism during wartime while independent. jwi may be a crime in mainstream media, but it is the kind of unauthorized, on embedded coverage that you get from the authors and journalists that we have assembled on this panel. it is the kind of coverage you get from the jeremy scandals -- skahills, and the independent media outlets that are so featured at this conference this weekend. many liberal journalists who were vocal about war and human rights and civil liberties during the bush area seem to have lost or muted their voices during the obama era.

it says something about the lack of serious national debate about so-called national security, that last month, one of the loudest mainstream tv news questioners of the president's right to assassinate americans was sean hannity at fox. that is obscene. it says something about mainstream tv that the toughest and most consistent questioners are not on a news channel. they are on the comedy channel. a few weeks ago, i watched a passionate john stuart taking on u.s. military spending. he said, we already spend more on defense than the next 12 countries combined, including china, including russia. we are like the lady on jerry springer who can stop getting breast implants. and of course, he put up a photo of the jerry springer guest. what our media obediently calls the war on terror is experienced

in other countries as a u.s. war of terror. kidnappings, night raids, torture, drone strikes. the killing and maiming of innocent civilians that just creates more enemies for our country. you can get that reality in some of the mainstream media of our allied countries in europe. you cannot get it in the mainstream media in our country. it is our country that is waging this global perpetual war. in a democracy, that should be the subject of a raging debate. we have assembled this panel because all of our panelists have rigorously subjected u.s. war policies to questioning and debate, no matter who is in the white house. they have worked hard to describe the elephants of the room. i will introduce the now. each will make a short opening statement. then we will have some brief

panel discussion here and open it up to the whole room, elephants included. you can send your questions or comments up on cards. those will be passed out shortly. our first presenter, many of you know her as the host and executive producer out of k ps k los angeles, the uprising radio show. she has been doing solidarity work with afghan women since 2000, before the 9/11 attacks and the u.s. invasion and occupation. she has visited afghanistan and it led to a book called, "bleeding afghanistan," she has a masters of science degree from

the university of hawaii. -- in astrophysics. she also has a two-month-old baby. let us welcome her. [applause] >> thank you. a two-month-old and a five-year- old. i want to address a few of the major issues that journalists struggle with when covering the afghanistan war. the first of the wars on terror and the longest war that the u.s. has ever fought and the war i am most familiar with. much of the coverage of the afghanistan war is not totally unique. it is similar to the coverage that other u.s. wars have gotten. it does not question very much the government's rhetoric or motives. it does not pay much attention to those most affected by our policies think and feel about the war. we are familiar with the case

made initially for invading and occupying afghanistan in 2001. we were told it was a moral imperative to free them the tyranny of the taliban while exacting revenge for the 9/11 attack. at that time, mainstream media did a stellar job of echoing the bush administration's line about the invasion and occupation. i remember the jingoism was so thick at the time, an essay published by the university of texas possessor -- professor critical of the war was met with such a mob of angry responses, it threatened to derail his academic career. his piece was quite the exception in the mainstream media. independent media, they were criticizing the rush to war. in the mainstream media, he was one of the exceptions.

then when telephone fell, they were quite -- rarely questioning what the u.s. did in afghanistan. if anyone question the wisdom of empowering these criminal warlords, they were countered with the notion of we want peace he for justice. -- a for justice. the "new york times" had a great piece about the northern alliance in quest for women's right and painted them as feminists compared to the taliban. we know how feminist they are today. there was more coverage about the northern alliance, these men that the u.s. was proud to put into power. desperate appeals to not give them government positions. there was a statement put out, by the oldest women's rights organization in afghanistan.

they put out a statement saying, the people of afghanistan do not accept donation of northern alliance. they did not get quoted in the "new york times." the the end of the bush era, a lot of talk about increasing troops to afghanistan before we can decrease them. troop surge got a lot of news coverage. it was pretty well discussed in terms of the amount of coverage that it got. most of the coverage centered on things like how effective it would be, whether there were enough troops in place. many examples, but one that comes to mind is the publishing of an article that made a moral argument i why there should be more troops. one saying that 40,000 extra troops was not enough. the guardian newspaper in britain, the mainstream outlets

of our allies had much more critical coverage. the guardian was there to publish the piece by the afghan women's rights activist who i have worked with, her op-ed titled a troop surge can only magnify the crime against afghan and. -- afghanistan. the u.s. government, significantly march the afghan war on the ground have been these deadly night raids. american soldiers have gone in and raided afghan villages, arrested and detained men and boys and women. there was a lot of coverage of the deadly shooting, mass shooting by staff sergeant robert bales that seemed to open the eyes of the mainstream media that these nitrates or even happening. aside from that one incident, no critical coverage of the

majority of night raids in the protest against these on the ground. there were exceptions like one independent journalist who has been based in afghanistan who wrote extensively about the chilling effect of the night raids. he wrote that on dispatch.com. he has been one of the few independent journalists covering what the regular afghan reactions are to the war. and we have the drone strikes. consequently, they were common in the border region between afghanistan and pakistan. today i becoming increasingly more upon inside afghanistan as we draw down troops. there has been coverage of the drone program, extensive coverage, most of it has been focused on how effective it is or whether it is legal or not.

not whether it is moral or not or what the actual effect on those who have these bombs rained upon them has been. one exception in mainstream media that i do want to call out, a writer for the associated press. she was one of the few mainstream journalists that has done good work on afghanistan. she has been covering it for decades and living there. she wrote a piece that was the exception, titled "afghan villagers flee homes, blaine u.s. drones." just for a moment on when afghans are quoted, even when they do interview afghans, they do so with very little regard for who they are. i have had first-hand or into this myself. i get calls from journalists all the time requesting interviews about what is happening inside afghanistan. they often mistake me for being afghan. when i told him i am not, i am

indian. sometimes the interview get canceled. they want authentic afghan voices, but any afghan will do. i had to correct broadcasters on live interviews when i have referred to me as afghan. they don't care who they interview. it does not matter if it is a u.s. educated afghan american who has worked in the karzai administration versus an afghan activist on the ground living in the community of and experiencing firsthand the effect of the u.s. policies. it does not matter. any afghan will do. that is similar to the u.s. approach to installing afghans in power. any will do. just put them in power. no distinguishing between afghans of different economic classes, different perspectives. it leads to a lot of

misunderstanding. it is a form of misunderstanding. if someone came cover the occupy wall street movement and grabbed the first american they could find, it might be a very skewed view of what is happening. one of the most difficult questions i think they grapple with here is over what the consequences of the impending u.s. withdrawal and the. many familiar with the time magazine cover of august 2010, the woman whose nose had been cut off by the taliban. and the headline said, what happens if we leave afghan? should have said, what is happening while we are occupying afghanistan ? it is true. the misogynists will be emboldened once the u.s. forces leave areas the context of that

message is greatly over simple fight. it has not taken into account how the u.s. has empowered exogenous warlords as a deliberate war strategy on the ground. also a anti-fundamentalist activists would like to see and do in their own country. many of the women i work with would rather achieve women's rights on their own, knowing full well the destruction that western emancipation in afghanistan of women has been like. unless there is deep journalism, an investigation of who is supporting whom, what the effects of our policies are, we are not going to know what is happening in that can stand on what will happen in the future. there needs to be the distinguishing of -- those who want freedom for women, men, children, freedom of the press, freedom from foreign occupation

and invasion. real democracy. those are two different the able. -- sets of people. that said, the challenge of facing afghan journalist inside afghanistan outweigh any concerns that american journalists face. it is difficult today to be a journalists inside afghanistan. doubly if you are a woman. afghan journalists who do distinguish between activists and those in power, they see reality -- firsthand to are the perpetrators. they report on it. they face a dizzying array of degrees that make it difficult for them to do their work and are often imprisoned and tortured by the government or hunted down and murdered by the taliban. a woman who started radio peace in afghanistan was shot in bed in the middle of the night with her toddler a few years ago.

it is not clear who assassinated her, because she was critical of the taliban and the u.s. backed government. if journalists can courageously cover what is really happening with very real risk to their lives, then american journalist can do far better than what i have been doing so far. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. our next speaker is marjorie, columnist, author, longtime criminal defense attorney. a professor at the thomas jefferson school of law in san diego. she testified before congress in 2008 about the bush administration's torture policy. she testified as an expert witness at military hearings about war, illegality, and the duty to disobey unlawful orders.

her latest book is "the united states and torture." her upcoming book is about drones and targeted killings. marjorie cohen. [applause] >> thank you jeff and my fellow panelist's. i am delighted to be here with you today. with so many places to get information, all claiming to have the truth, there is no objective truth. during the vietnam war there were three networks. no cable, no internet. every city had a democratic newspaper and a republican newspaper. even if they disagreed, there was a general court belief in perception. until 1968, the media dutifully served the government's narrative of the war until the tet offensive in 1968. status is when the national liberation front attacked all the major cities and 44 venture capitals and took over control

of two thirds of the country of vietnam. right after that was reported, no serious person could believe that the war could be won. walter cronkite went to vietnam and said, this war is a stalemate. movement led to questioning of the entire society, culture, music, free love, drugs and distribution of power. wars in iraq and afghanistan have been monumental failures by any objective standard. it took years to get a consensus against the iraq war. we have expanded coverage, we have diversified coverage, but so has the other side. with the proliferation of cable ft got more channels and so did the right. they have become corporate. news has become opinion. analysis analysis has become a cover for opinion.

there are big rewards for pundits who are paid by the cable channels. ,ard reporting, journalism suffers because it is not as somatic as taking extreme positions. covering the war has a harder time creating is sosus because society polarized. there is such a diversity of opinions on public issues, there is no truth. the political polarization prevents a national consensus on issues of war and peace. we don't have a draft, which made a huge difference in turning public opinion against the vietnam war. the problem is reaching people -- don't go on left westside websites or tv or radio. we are preaching to the choir. many on the left don't like to hear criticism of obama, and that is another challenge that we face. [applause]

lawrence o'donnell pointed out that all of the cable news stations combined are watched by only one percent of the viewers. the fraction of viewers watching fox, msnbc and cnn, it is a meaningless number in terms of the politics of the country. rachel maddow can't have the impact of a walter cronkite, because that is one third of one percent. msnbc being roughly one third. cronkite would raise issues and congress would hold hearings. that is both positive and negative. pushing a story to get those who care about it and pick it up also galvanizes the opposition. resonates with millions of people who see it on the tv news. now it is gone unless it is covered by everyone. has somenative media effect on the corporate media.

torture led to some hearings, but it never became central on the public agenda. .rones are becoming a big issue not because we are illegally killing people in other countries off the battlefield, but because a paper was leaked that indicates the government may kill u.s. citizens on u.s. soil. because the bush administration and now the obama administration, through the corporate media, has been so successful in terrorizing the american public about the so- called threat of terrorism, most people don't care about foreigners being killed. much of the terrorism propaganda is fueled by racism. of the 366 u.s. drone attacks that have killed 3581 people in 316 weresince 2002, launched by the obama administration. less than two percent of those killed were high-profile

taliban militants. most of them were civilians. since then 11, there have been no official figures on how many people have been killed by drone strikes and other kinds of targeted killing, because of the extreme secrecy. lindsey graham's figure is 4700 people killed by drone strikes. only four of whom were u.s. citizens. a long time, independent media and antiwar activists criticize the drone more. the bureau of investigative journalism documents million casualties. generals like mcchrystal, former diplomats, foreign policy at -- experts are talking about blowback from drones. the in advisability, the political fallout. the leak of the white paper and rand paul's filibuster focused attention on the killing of u.s. citizens.

not on the killing of other people. the house judiciary committee held hearings, but again, just focused on u.s. citizens. although targeted killings, not just drones. a gallup poll released about two weeks ago showed that 65% of americans think we should use drone strikes in other countries against suspected terrorist. that was done to 41% of people who favor tags in other countries against u.s. citizens 25%ng abroad and down to who favor strikes against suspected terrorists living in the united states. only 13% of the people surveyed believe that we should use drone strikes against u.s. citizens in the united states. of u.s.ricans think citizens, they think of white people. we all know about the hype of

weapons of mass destruction. many of us were covering up the time -- covering it at the time. to war,d not rush there is no reason to. we are seeing a similar kind of hype with the chemical weapons narrative by the syrian government. this may well lead to an attack on syria when we saw obama in israel recently, his big signature victory was getting israel to apologize to turkey for the killing of nine turks in the flotilla. i am wrapping up. in conclusion to pieces of advice for independent journalists, keep your head down and don't believe what government officials kelly. thank you. [laughter] [applause] that is also the advice we got from the late the stone.

our next panel is is is the award winner and host and executive producer of democracy now. she has built up one of the most important daily newscast in the history of our country. few other sources cover issues of war and peace, human rights, civil liberties, as doggedly as democracy now. she also has a weekly syndicated column. her fifth and latest book, this one with dennis monahan, is "the silent majority or coach will be signing books after this panel out in the exhibit hall. [applause] amy goodman. thank you. it isn't on moment the wherewithal to colleagues -- it is an honor to be here with all

of my colleagues. -- 45 yearsrs ago martin luther king was gunned down. the year to the day before he was killed, april 4, 1967, he spoke at riverside church in new york city. he uttered those words about the country he loved, about the and i'm its, that it is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. he was speaking out against the vietnam war. his closesten inner circle warned him against. he said, you have got the voting rights, the most powerful person on earth on your side, the civil

rights act. you got him to agree with you. why would you alienate him now? web, histhis was all a concern about human rights at home and abroad. next year, he was increasingly outspoken about ward. response of the media come up from the "new york times" to "time" magazine. calling it propaganda and that him is doing a disservice to his people. to his cause. i think we have to look back 45 years ago and assess where we are today. where is the media today afte?

when the iraq war began, march 19, 2003, a few weeks before, the organization that just cohen founded, fair, did a study. : howe two weeks around will giving his push for the war at the un, february 5 2003. a speech that general powell would later call a stain on his that speech was the final nail in the coffin for so many. he had been hesitant about the war. he had a great deal of credibility. he said yes, the evidence was in, there were weapons of mass destruction. fair did a study of the two

weeks around that address and list of the four major nightly newscasts. in that two-week time, six weeks before the invasion, these were the agenda setters. this was extremely significant. this was the time when americans are making up their minds about half the population was for the war, have opposed. -- half opposed. there were 393 interviews done about more. guess how many were with the antiwar leaders cap th? maybe 200, 150. three. three of almost 400. that is no longer a mainstream media. that is an extreme media eating the drums for war -- beating the drums for war. i really do think that those who are deeply concerned about war,

those concerned about the growing inequality in this country, those concerned about climate change, the fate of the fringe are not a minority. not even a silent majority. the silenced majority, silenced by the corporate media. we have to take it back. the democracy now team and my colleagues are here filming and interviewing people. it is wonderful to be part of a , and mypeople colleagues in the broader pacifica family. we came into denver a few days ago. we came in to the airport. were some soldiers there from buckley kicking up a general. i thought they were waiting at the general behind me. i came back and they were in uniform and said to them, you know democracy now? yes ma'am, they said. they watch every day.

i said why. they said, it is objective. you are talking about war. it is not whether you are for or against the war. it is that we cover war. it is on the front pages of democracy now, even though it broadcast.and tv buchanan read it as well. serious no more decision a country can make them go to war. whether you agree with it or not, we must cover this everyday. everyday. yesterday, a great heroine was in our mid-steer. carlotta, the youngest of the little rock nine. september 25, 19 57 it was that she and eight other young students, she was 14 years old, stood out to an angry mob of 1000 people she walked into

totral high in little rock get an education, surrounded by national guard. when she was here speaking yesterday, she said she was inspired then. what were the lessons she learned. she was inspired by the story of emmett till. a young boy who had died two years before she did this. the summer of 1955, his mother to get out of the city for the summer. he went to mississippi and was living in his aunt and uncle's house. he was ripped out of bed by a white mob in state tortured and beat him and he ended up at the bottom of the river.

his mother was not an activist at that time. but she understood something very deep. she said she wanted the casket of emmett (awake in the funeral. she wanted the world to see the ravages of racism. thousands went by his casket and saw. black publications, the kind , the sametta publications that she said were , sheing her issues described a group of black journalists dared to cover the little rock nine. being beaten, one of them almost to death. he was a former marine. a black reporter. here was mainly tell, not a reporter reporter, but she understood how important it was the world to see the images. magazineagazine -- jet

published the images and the overseer did the history and the consciousness. she had something very important to teach all of us today. to teach the press today. show the pictures. show the images. could you imagine if for just one week we saw the images of war? the top of every report we did, the corporate media did, the independent media, every top of every radio and television newscasts, everyone's facebook wall, every story was about a soldier dead or dying, a woman with her legs blown off. by a bomb or a drone attack, the top story above the fold of every surviving newspaper in this country. it showed a baby dead on the

ground with an actual story naming her home and telling us the story of her family. , if every e-week mail told when the stories, americans are a compassionate people. they would say no. war is not the answer to conflict in the 21st century. democracy now. [applause] >> thank you so much, amy. our final panelist is norman solomon, the co-author of a dozen books, including a memoir. in the landmark book "war made easy."

is the founder and director of the institute for public accuracy, he led three peace seeking trips to iraq before the and a couple of fact-finding missions to iran and afghanistan. for 17 years, he wrote a nationally syndicated column of media criticism. he now writes a weekly column focused on politics for websites such as common dreams and truth out. we cofounded the online roots -- group rootsaction.org. we are urging they give this year's peace prize to the military whistleblower bradley manning. [applause]

>> we are gathering here in a political context that includes one major political party has given faith a bad name and the other major political party has given hope a bad name. the reality is that we can't get very far or move very far forward if we don't have faith, a secular faith at least, in democracy. we can't get very far without hope that the human capacity to care for each other and work together is going to create a better world. in democracy and hope and the possibilities of creating a better world need to them in themselves and incubate andgrow in journalism journalists and their institutions. war thrives on abstraction and propaganda.

stone said that sometimes it is so exciting to work on a story you can forget that the house is burning. thaton brown reminded us there are lives in the balance, there are people, not only under fire but are suffering and living and dying and the consequences of the failures of journalism to serve the interest of the public rather than serving the interest of the state and corporate power. we look at the context we're living in today, it has got to be be acknowledged and confronted that we live in a new war that contrary to the assertions of claims of aspirations, -- of our current president in his second and i girl address, -- inaugural

address, that commitment and belief and agile war is central to what the u.s. government is of thatd acceptance perpetual war is central to what the mainline media of this country are about. the near virtual consensus that crosses the aisle on capitol hill for the so-called war on terror neighbors and is mirrored , thee mass media purportedly public media that you will hear on all things considered and morning edition and the pbs news hour. has so-called war on terror become the wallpaper of the echo chamber for almost one dozen years. we have lived through one war after another for decades in this country, aided and abetted by what passes for journalism.

if we don't look at what were -- we go andsh war look at what war thrives on, the basis of this warfare state that recognizes no boundaries or war as an distraction is based on two tiers ofgrief -- i grief. theirs and ours. an emotional valuation of human beings that grinds the lens through which tinted red white and blue we are encouraged to see the world every day through our mass media. that isa reality

combined with the propaganda aspect or what george orwell described as hubble think -- doublethink. what would we think of it was done to us? if another country exercised impunity to send drones, aerial vehicles, across our borders to strike at will? late senator wayne morris believed in international law, is among the few in congress during the build up to the vietnam war who challenged that kind of impunity. by thes been normalized warfare state and the state of journalism and mass media of our country. toir relationship is central the plowing of huge quantities

of resources. financial, industrial, and human into workfare. -- warfare. ,eanwhile, our cities are dying the bombs in vietnam exploded home. the missiles fired in pakistan. exploding in our own country where we don't provide health care, housing, helping children, helping the elderly. president isded now slashing against the core of the social contract with social security and medicare. part of the warfare state. they antidote to those poisons .s independent journalism we are here at this conference and people around the country are working every day very hard to sustain the possibilities, to make them more real and more vibrant, so that we can serve

and createte thething that is worthy of term journalism. if you use the metaphor of the toy politic, what happens the human body without circulation? you have blockage. ies. aries -- coronar we are suffering grievously from the blockages and failure of circulation of ideas and information. with the imperative ,o challenge the compulsion the compulsive disorder, the spin cycle for war. now it is hard to keep track of the various phases that we are in. you can't withdraw from afghanistan "too fast."

that is one part of the spin cycle. another is the slow burn of building the agenda for war or attack on iran. thater is the doublethink tries to justify the scenario of a possible attack on north korea. wereou imagine if wargames undertaken along the borders of the united states of america, including simulating a nuclear attack? what our reaction would in this country? yet the paranoia of the north korean regime is being fed and fueled by the double standard that are inherent in u.s. media coverage. whether it is iran or north korea thomas ratified, amplified thise mainline media in

country, do as we say not as we do. probably encountered. that is not very convincing. i met evil in afghanistan or in afghanistan are ironic, do as we say, not as we do. pay attention not to the rhetoric, but the reality. let me close on this note. the challenge of journalism, of holds aagement, special responsibility to scrutinize the actions of our own government and the consequences. it is not only that we should cover those actions and consequences, but we have a special responsibility to make sure that we cover those actions and consequences. we can build tension to independent journalism that

says, as american journalist's , we will not accept the double standard. we will watch dog and her dog -- and dog and scrutinize challenge our own government. as we contemplate this war often as we in, try to track off an overwhelming news, it can yield or a disoriented. like maybe we are losing our bearings. .osing our sense of core ,uite often, we might feel what is the through line? what keeps us going? i believe that human rights has to be a single standard. ,hat helps us not to get lost

not have the abstractions of off course.w us there is an expression among some musicians. you may feel like you're getting lost, but you won't if you know the blues. we may feel we are getting lost. but we won't if we have a singles entered of human rights. if we remember that when martin luther king jr. denounced the madness of militarism, what his book of was not just about what , but whatng in 1967 is occurring right now. right now, the u.s. government totinues with impunity assert its prerogative with its military might to wage war cross

not as people who tune into the news but people who create it for the better. thank you. [applause] >> thank you norman. i want to ask a quick question. a bunch of us have touched on it already and that's journalist putting partisanship over principle. that's if you have a president you prefer over the other guy and that president is in power you mute your voice. any final comment than. >> i remember when michael moore wrote an open let tore president obama about the

escalation of the afghan war. it was a surprise. and i'm greatly respect michael's work and everything he does. but i think many on the left were caught off guard by obama's escalation of the afghan war which he campaigned on it. that was the central aspect of his foreign policy platform when he ran for office was escalating the afghan war while drawing down the iraq war which we shouldn't have been in any way surprised, saddened, disappointed when he did exactly that. he broke many promises but he tcheapt one promise that he made. i also want to mention when i was talking about the folks who did do very good coverage of the afghanistan war when it was first unfolding and still unfolding, amy interviewed

members and myself and my co-author and independent journalist who did the coverage and have continued to do it under obama. >> anyone else want to make a final comment? >> i know jeremy as soon as obama was elected at the bottom of his articles he would write jeremy pledges to be the same journalist he was under president clinton and bush's presidency. he talks about how he got the ost vicious hate mail than during all the years he was exposing bush's torture. >> i think everyone here has been critical of the democrats but the question from the floor as active citizens, what do we

encourage people here to do to build independent media, what are specific things we call on ur active people here to do? >> to do your job. to dig deep. it is not about who is president, whether the president is a republican, democrat, maybe some day in the future an independent or a green, who knows. it's about going beyond the words and so much of politics today is debating what is meant by particular words. it is our job to evaluate the actions and also most importantly not just to give voice to those in power, but to be there at the target end especially here in the united states as american journalist of u.s. foreign policy.

the week of the 10th an ver si of the iraq war we did special programming all week. i didn't think that would be have an lutionary to iraqi woman feminist activist deeply concerned about what is happening in her country. for iraqis the war isn't over right now. i didn't think that was a big deal. but when you look at the rest of the media in this country, to hear an iraqi voice was highly ununusual. but that is our job to go to where the silence is. what is their assessment of their country right now ten years later? we just have to get back to basic principles of good

journalism. let people speak for themselves. and the forum for failures if you look at what we have suffered in our life times we have seen difference to those in power. and this segways back to the previous question, it's very

difficult sometimes to watch fox news. it's also difficult sometimes to watch msnbc for the same reasons. because in both cases those networks are dominated by journalists and commentators who general flesket toward the leaders of one major political party and villainize the leaders of the other. that's not journalism or any sense of debate. the other answer to that question is we need to build and sustain our independent media outlets, tv, radio , online web sites, independent producers of documentaries. that requires support from individuals, foundations, all sorts of configurations so that we have the capacity to build our own independent media while

we confront and challenge the main line media. >> i just want to add one example sort of to broaden out what you are saying, the example of the keystone pipeline. if you think that doesn't relate to war, it does. because what is the keystone pipeline about? it's bringing this very dirty oil from canada down to the gulf. why? well, it's about the tremendous hunger for fossil fuels and think about why we wage wars. the joke of the little kid talking about iraq turning to his dad and saying what is our oil doing under their sand. but if you look just go back a few weeks agos there was the largest environmental protest in history in washington, d.c. i tuned in to msnbc that night

to look at the coverage. they cover what is happening in the world and especially on that day each day digesting the news. i did not see -- i didn't watch it non-stop all night but i watched a lot of it, a tronchese this environmental protest because it was protesting the obama administration. right now president obama is in the midst of deciding whether to allow the keystone excel pipeline to be built. and there is this exxon moible oil spill in arkansas. i tuned in to msnbc to see how they were covering it. they talked about the oil spill outside of little rock that has drown a subdivision in arkansas. but they are talking about this is happening in the midst of president obama making this decision about the larger

keystone pipeline. if you tune to fox they would cover the environmental protest, they would just slam it. but at least you know it happened. ou can read between the lines. >> i just want to pick up on what amy was talking about, two things during her talk and also in the q & a about the impact of showing images of people for example in iraq being killed and telling the stories, showing the targets of these policies and also letting them tell their stories and telling their stories. during the civil rights movement david writes about the power of television when people, when black people were being hosed down by fire hoses and that image and the images these very, very peaceful

children integrating the high school. and how that really turned public opinion in favor of the civil rights movement. during vietnam one of the things in addition to the draft and the g.i. movement which was central to that movement, what really affected people were seing the body bags coming back. of course we haven't seen body bags coming back from the afghan and iraq wars. when i was a freshman i was a cheerleader and all of that, the beginning of my freshman year i went to the student union and saw this grainy black and white film and it was that image of that young girl naked running from the na pam aftered the been dropped by an american bomb. the decision i made to get

involved in the anti-war movement was not an intellect you'll one. just struck me oh my god is this what we're doing. it's important to tell those stories and show those images but not shun away from stories that might not be popular to everyone on the left such as what israel is doing to the palestinians. [applause] >> that was indeed a couple of comments on these cards is coverage of israel and palestinians. while we're on the subject of images let's remember what pushed martin luther king over the edge where he had to speak out against the vietnam war and he was the most single powerful individual voice against the vietnam war, he saw the images

of young kids victims in vietnam and he saw those images in a radical magazine. he talked about it at length about he couldn't stay sile president nt anymore. when it comes to what people can do out here -- >> for the exact quote responding to that speech he gave time magazine called the speech slander king i did minute shd his useful tons his cause, his country, his people. >> one of the action that is people can take out here that are interested in an organized challenge of main stream media bias whether it's afghanistan palestinian is to join the activist list at fair.org. they go after the media outlets that can be moved. how many of you are on the list

of fair.org? >> if you are interested in activism you should be on that list. >> we send daily headlines. check it out. and that's for everyone here. it's very important as you talk about building media, jeff, is we take ipped pent -- it shouldn't be the alternative. as i said, the corporate media is the extreme media. i do think independent media represent it is main stream in this country today. we must protect independent media because that is the really the hope of the future. >> how do we get more balanced coverage of israel palestinian issues? for your information it is trongly tilted in favor of

israel? >> it's all about a single standard of human rights. if you insist on a single standard, the reflexive devaluation of palestinian lives that has for so long dominated u.s. mass media will be challenged directly. it's one thing for a president to talk about seeing things through somebody else's eyes. another thing to on a day in day out basis, not through platitudes but through coverage and public discourse to say we have a single standard of human rights and of grief that the suffering of a palestinian is just as important as the suffering of an israelly. turning. the tide is

public opinion has probably shifted pretty significantly in terms of how palestinians are viewed. there have been some incredible successes recently on college campuses recently. even if the main stream media is not covering it, the public is getting it through social media. the challenge is getting our politicians to change the way they vote and convincing them that there is not necessarily a political price for standing up to israel. but i think public opinion on that one issue is seeing some slow change that hasn't really happened in a long time. especially after israel's recent incursions and various invasions in the past few years of lebanon and palestinian territories. >> a few of us have talked about it, it led to a question, do we think the main stream network news contributed to

ending the vietnam war? if , so what has changed in these intervening decades? >> one of the myths of the united states led the way to ending the vietnam war. the reality is that the mass media of the united states had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the anti-war movement to do coverage of the vietnam war just as has been the case in the last decade for these proliferated wars. the myth soling something that we need to challenge because it mind if nto a frame of we can get the mass media to operate properly our job is done. we must insist they do their

job properly. >> i think amy is reading the quotes of how the main stream reacted when martin luther king came out against the vietnam war. there was no anti-war voices until 1968 or later that were allowed into the serious main stream. >> i think of danny glover who joked but i think it's serious, he wonders if dr. martin luther king would be invited to any of the celebrations of his life on the federal holiday that people fought so hard for for so many years. >> think about how they reacted th to the military whistle blower who brings forward these documents. if you've seen the movie, the documentary, it almost amounted to civil disobedience.

when one main stream media was stopped another picked it up. when they were stopped another picked it up. now look how they've reacted to the whistle blower named bradley manning. this 25-year-old who is facing life in prison. the iraq war logs, the afghan war logs, the u.s. state department and the role they play in atrosstiss or covering up prosecutions in europe against c.i.a. officers who have engaged in torture or kidnapping. it's like night and day. >> i think it's very important to talk about bradley manning. this about this: this is a young man who was in the army in iraq who has said he did download these documents. he has been held for three

years without trial, three years. when it was last time you heard his voice? if you tune into democracy now had you to strug toll hear it but that's because we got a secret recording of him speaking in the courtroom. why is he forbidden of speaking? why can't you hear what it is he has to say? why is it so radical to bring you his voice. someone bravely in the courtroom secretly recording his statement to the judge about why he did what he did. bradley manning and julian who in the up right now ecuador embassy in sweden. he's not as concerned about going to sweden than the

possibility of being extradited to the united states. why would he be concerned? does the words bradley manning ring a bell? this is a serious situation when you think of these documents in a country we are seeing a crack down on information like we haven't seen before. the number of whistle blowers who are being prosecuted under the obama administration, more being prosecuted today than in all past administrations combined. the story of bradley manning is more than the story of this one young man. it is a message to all whistle blowers understand particularly young people in the military who have went and come back and seen atrocities terrified to speak out because they are afraid could they face the same fate. it is our job at journalist to bring you this information.

and so for all the bloggers and jirnlist who are listening and watching and will see this on c-span and other global and national outlets. we have a responsibility. it is extremely serious. [applause] >> you know the efforts to silence bradley manning for the good of quote national security, are metaphorically both not allowing as much as possible as the government would have it his voice to be heard, but also of course his crime quote unquote was to inform the american public and the world about information that is supposed to be available to the consent of the governed. we're supposed to know what our government is doing in our names with our tax dollars. when it comes to media coverage

it is very dismissive in main line media towards bradley manning. i want to mention about ten days ago there was a petition asking the nor wiegen no bell committee to award the no bell peace prize to bradley manning. and we got coverage on that on pacific co-radio in this country. national public radio wouldn't touch it. overseas media contacted us and we have 40,000 people who have to sign ootsaction.org that petition to the no bell committee. bradley manning epitomizes the meaning of the no bell peace prize just as martin luther king did. [applause] >> i want to touch on what you

were saying in terms of what has changed with media landscape between then and now. certainly as our main stream media has gotten more consolidated, the views have become narrower. 40 years ago we couldn't communicate with one another in the same way that we can now. believe it or not journalist like myself will trol our facebook pages to see what is trending and what fellow activists are seeing as important or reporting. and the nature of juremlism has changed. everyone of you is capable of spreading a story, sparking a light to get that story heard. i have on my facebook page not just my fellow activists but moms and dads from my kid's schools. and often times things i post people who don't consider

themselves activists pick them up and pass it on. all of us have an ability to do that. rootsaction.org is a website. these are web based strategies that are blurring the lines between advocacy and journalism if there was a line to begin with. that is something we should not forget. despite how dismal the landscape of media seems, what is considered journalism today is more exciting than ever. which is why we have to keep the internet open and free and not let the cable companies and the telecoms write the legislation that would privatize this global resource that allows us to communicate with each other all over the world. and i want to point out why it's helpful to be here in

denver colorado. it's not a figurement of our optimistic imagination that there is independent media. this say hot bed of independent media. you have the wonderful radio station kngu. you have colorado public television and denver open media which is pioneering ways of putting together internet and public access. have you community stations. today i'll be going to a fundraiser for a new radio station that is just about to be established kffr. you can go to kffr.org. we will be there during the dinner break. new ones being established,

free speech tv is right here in denver. and link tv is in lax. tv. ll of this community media, rocky mountain 150-year-old media that dies. it becomes a one paper town. then the colorado independent pops up. i think this isn't unique. all over the country we have to open our eyes and work together and join these independent media spaces. >> while we're talking about colorado independent media let's not forget alternative radio . [applause] >> i want to make announcement that the freedom of press foundation is having an event press ey manning and freedom at 1:00 in this

building. and i think amy said something so important, it's one of the centerpieces of this whole conference had is the need to fight for net neutrality so these four companies which bring us our internet which is a, the and t, comcast and time warner need to have legislation passed so they cannot have a two tiered system so the web sites they own are in the fast lane and democracy now is pushed off into say slow lane. when he was campaigning for president candidate president obama said i take a backseat to no one on the issue of net neutrality. we've had five years and his f.c.c. commission chair has basically punted on the issue. it's one of the most important

issues we have if we care about building up independent media. [applause] >> let's do a round of a few quick questions. one was what the is latest reports regarding the quan tan mow hunger strike which is a central place in the war on terror. the u.s. denying press access to the prison for at least a month. anyone want to comment on that? david reams is one of our co-attorneys. he's assisting us with the trial of the century. henls et al. versus obama et al.? >> that is frightening folks. that has not been in our mass

media. it has been covered on the front page in the u.k. and guardian and our papers have not covered this vital trial. some of the best juremmists are plaintiffs in this suit. but a member of parliament from iceland who protected julian a judge ruling in our favor and guess what last may happened, the judge was removed from the courtroom by navy sales protecting her and from the courthouse. our plaintiffs have had all kind of threats and we are holding firm. and what must we do as journalists and people who are

activist we must support as david does in gaun on the month very effectively and he is saying that it is increasing and that the starvation protest is increasing and he feels that coverage is coveragehe feels te increasing also. please hang in there. , 166 men heldy at guantanamo. a majority of them have been cleared for release. in number of them held for more than a decade. more than hundred are on hunger strike and have been for many weeks now. this is our responsibility to cover. what message does it send to countries, repressive regimes around the world, that the united states is holding scores

of prisoners without charge to have been cleared by the u.s. for release and you are being held indefinitely? check out democracynow.org for the latest. experienceemarkable of interviewing and person women went to delhi -- when we went to doha. he was the only analyst held their -- the onyl journalists held there. he was never charged. he was interrogated more than thosemes, msost of times as he was held. he was a cameraman going from pakistan to afghanistan. most of the time, he was questioned about the leadership of al jazeera. anyone who works for any news organization, the big ones, how much do you know about your leaders?

but the fact that this is happened over and over again, it's our job to cover it. the hunger strikers at guantanamo are being forced fed. they take it to -- they take a tube, stick it in their nose. very painful. you could see the blood in the bile from the prior prisoner going into your own nose. force-feeding a person who understood the consequences of refusing food amounts to torture. this is going on right now under the obama administration. norman is going to get the floor and we will take final statements all the way up the panel. thank you so much for coming out to this session. what we've just heard about the last few minutes is part of a hugely important yet relatively small part of what has been

called now for almost a dozen years the war on terror. whether it is civil liberties or human rights, counterinsurgency or whether it is called national security, this has to do with profound decisions that are being made through omission or commission. they have to do with the world that will be existing for the next generation. i want to announce here clams for a tribunal on the war on 2013, under the sponsorship of an organization i am part of, the institute for public accuracy. i want to ask everybody in this room and everybody not in this room who is hearing this for him to consider helping us launch this tribunal on the war on terror. .org to go to accuracy see what we do at the institute and contact us that way. also we have some flyers. huge tribunala

and washington, dc, with documentary testimony on every aspect of the war on terror and let us use our own capacity to research, organize, and publicize and challenge these policies. >> thank you norman solomon. amy goodman. >> i'm going to be on c-span tomorrow from noon eastern to 3:00. it will include a lot of e-mail and you can call in. i hope you do. it's a grave for him around the country for different forces -- it's a great forum around the country for different voices. during the time of the iraqi war, you had general colin powell helping to lead that were and michael powell, head of a war on- fcc leading diversity of voices here at home, pushing for deregulation of the media. the current chair -- th e

response then was unbelievable. millions writing in. suddenly people became aware. when people learn about what is happening, they respond. they understand that having newspaper, radio, tv and one town owned by the same media mogul is a threat to our democracy. right now, the current head of the fcc has announced he's going to be leaving. another of the five commissioners has announced he leaving leaving. there are only five commissioners. whateads this agency in direction president obama gives them to makes an enormous difference for the media landscape in this country. i see the media as a huge kitchen table that stretches across the globe doubly also also the down and debate in the -- debate and discuss the most important issues of the day. anything less than that is a disservice to the servicemen and

women of this country. they can't have the debate on military bases. they rely on us to have the discussions that lead to the decisions about whether they lived or died. whether they are sent to kill or be killed. anything less than that is a disservice to a democratic society. >> thank you amy goodman. now marjorie collins. >> bradley manning was tortured for nine months when he was in the military break at quantico, virginia, held in solitary confinement. experts have called that torture which can lead to hallucinations and suicide. it was after it was a great public outcry and a letter to the obama administration from many people from civil society that he was moved out of quantico and into fort leavenworth where he is in the general population now. revealed classified information but not top-secret

information. dan ellsberg revealed top-secret information and dan has said that bradley manning had access to stop secret -- to top-secret information but refrained from the bolting it. now they're going after wikileaks. they are not going after the new york times in the guardian who also picked up the story. only wikileaks. as amy said, the secrecy and the obama administration is unprecedented. james madison said that sunshine is the best antidote to tear any and it's up to us -- to tyranny and up to us to shed light on what the government is doing in our name. [applause] cohn.ank you, marjorie and now sonali. >> i want to call attention to the fact that because today we to hearthe ability stories directly by those people who are affected through their you cans on websites,

peoplesee what those who are affected by the afghanistan war are saying, thinking, and feeling. go to these websites, see the statements they put out. see a photograph that they used to document the war. do it yourself. when the war was at its peak about five or six years ago, there was such a clear correlation in my book. my co-author and i did a brief study of how media coverage of the afghanistan war correlated so strongly with attention paid to groups lik, even if those sts weren't covering both people directly. people found the website of these organizations and these women and thereby supported them, heard their stories.

when the media does not cover them, the attention that these groups and activist get really falls. as he be given -- as we begin our withdrawal of troops, it does not mean the war is ending her that we should forget about people whose lives our tax dollars have directly affected. in addition to supporting thependent media, support people on the ground themselves making change jury find out what they are doing and going through. share their documents and interviews on your social networks and keep the word out dealing withy are the very real effects of our drone attacks and is very destructive policies that have affected ordinary men, women, and children. we may never get to know their faces and their names and their families but those who do represent them, some of them are out there and they are reaching out to us via the internet.

as long as the internet is free, you and i do have access to that the please explore that. like thank you. [applause] that is sonali. i'm jeff cohen with the park center as it got ithaca college. the freelike to thank press for organizing this conference on media reform. [applause]

...

>> when i woke up this morning and started writing my speech, i was thinking about my first month on campus in september when i was a freshman. the football team went into that season ranked number one in the nation. i remember that september when i got here. there was all this excitement on campus. our first game was at wisconsin. ourent out there and lost first game 21-14. there was this crushing disappointment afterward. i would like you to think of that soaring expectation followed by crushing disappointment as a metaphor for your next 20 minutes with me.

>> advice for graduates. friday night at 8:00 eastern. including fbi director and florida governor rick scott. apple cofounder steve wozniak. five more features online. clarence thomas recently sat down for a conversation about his life and career. he talked about his childhood , his politics, and the work of the court. this is just over an hour. [applause] [inaudible] >> i have not evicted her. the story of your life growing up is really a remarkable one, justice thomas. do you know what part of west africa your family came from?

>> i think they lost the itinerary. [laughter] no, that was in the 1700s. i don't think anyone quite knows. for those who are from the deep south, much was unwritten. the people are into their genealogy now. i have no idea of much of my own genealogy. some of my relatives told me we do not want to know. but, the answer is no. it is unfortunate. that is one reason why in the last few years we have tried to focus on trying to retain some of what is left of that culture. when you look across the country, you see the fine

buildings, the sandstone buildings, the beautiful architecture. there is much of an effort to preserve those things. there is another part of culture, of people who aren't preferred, of people who had a caste system, would be the untouchables. their culture was just as rich. it was just as important, just a central. the effort to retain that, or to record the is not there. we would spend more time on aristotle or socrates, more time on frank lloyd wright, but none but none on the unlettered. you look at the barrier islands

that is where my family is from. some people may have heard from the term fiji. that is because those of us who were from those islands also -- most is bordered. -- one of the slurs grow my way was fiji. i was proud to be fiji. i have never been ashamed of where i am from. i think it is a wonderful culture. the people are wonderful people. family speak the gola -- does your family speak the gola language?

>> he spoke the exact same wing was. i am from a different island. that is where we went to live. it is hard to really do it. it would be similar to west indian dialect. when i went north in the 60s, people would ask if i was indian. i would have no idea what they were talking about. it was not like i had travel to the caribbean. my wife accuse me recently of -- she said i was beginning to talk my language again. anyone who is from that part of

the country or ethnic groups will know that you do not come back into that group speaking the king's english. otherwise people will say you think you are better than us now. there is this delicate balance. that is one thing, when we went north in the 1960s, you had to move in and out of cultures. you moved into the white culture. then you moved into the urban culture. moved into the northern culture. then he went back to your home culture. it you talk to buddies one way, you talked to her parents another way. you might be speaking at three or four different languages every day. i wasn't going to say anything. i am willing to bet you that you just can't immediately start talking your pittsburghese, but

if you are in a conversation, you slide -- what led which are you talking? i have always been respectful of the people who spoke it. i still, i love it. i love going home. as soon as i crossed the savanna river, finally i am home. when i stopped in washington dc, i was going to go home. i only went to law school to go home. finally i was going home. i've been been stuck in this place for 30 years. it was kind of other people or trying to prevent me from going. what do i care? >> we are fortunate to learn about your home life in georgia.

which is really a very touching book. tell the audience who your grandfather was, and what he what did he mean to you? >> it is embarrassing to sit here and watch that stuff. i did not want to write the memoir. people have a tendency to re- create us in public life. i think i owed it to my grandparents to leave a record, and the people around me, all the people who made up this wonderful world, that we somehow sweep over because we have to have a narrative of how

tolerable it was. these were good people who try to make you lead a decent life. iowa to them to leave a record. my initial plan was to record it and leave it. to leave it in my papers. i still have the entire manuscript. it was only to leave an accurate record. eventually, i was told, it is probably good to put it in the form of a book. then i made the fatal mistake. i signed a book contract. [laughter] that sentencing your own self. i sentence you to a book contract. that was really -- talk about an eighth amendment violation. [laughter] once i got started, it was very hard.

it was two pages a day. everything you do. your homework. you push yourself, you push yourself. having to relive it, think about things that you hadn't thought about for years. having to dredge up memories and pains, to put it on a piece of paper. you live your life. you give it your best shot. there are things that, we have all said it, i just want to get it behind me. i am through that. i'm going to put it behind me. >> some said about writing opinions. [indiscernible] >> let me ask you, specifically about the nuns where you were educated. what did you learn from them?

>> a sister was my second grade teacher. i had a chance to go back and think all of my teachers, and to have a totally separate life. also, the ones who were just so sweet to me like sister mary. my second grade teacher, i never did make contact. sister mary said that when we arrived at saint benedict's, the gas with the cast-iron, you set to buy two and little tiny desks.

she made a stand and repeat why did god make you? god made us to know and serve him in this life, and be happy with him in the next. all the philosophy, nietzsche, kant comes back to what she said. they made us believe that we were inherently equal. that was a main stay. you see me repeat over and over. we were told under all circumstances we were inherently equal. that was in the face of segregation and theories that said we were inferior. they held us to that standard. those who are old enough and he

went to schools probably probably remember those exams. achievement test that you took at the end of each december and in may. those measured where you stood with the other schools. the nuns had held rb to the the fire. my favorite nun, my eighth grade teacher, she is still alive but not doing very well. she's at a retirement home. she was, when i was in 1962, i performed very well and high school entrance exams. i've always done well academically breathing that is god's gift.

she said, you lazy thing. she was right. i was kind of sliding by. i never forgot that. she called me out. fast forward to 10 years ago. i was there intent to fly visiting her with a friend of mine. a very dear friend of mine. i met him through tom, who graduated, a wonderful man. we were there with sister mary. she was in her 90s at the time. she still is. she said, when i die, this goes to the sisters, this goes to my

relatives, this goes to this person. and she took this photo of the two of us, and she did this to her chest. this goes to my coffin with me. to say that this photo, it that is just a bus, they will go there where she is to lay. >> they made you take latin. my children might see this program. >> the only latin i remember is always wear underwear. [laughter]

>> oh boy. >> that is what i learned. >> oh my goodness. i cannot believe you just did that. i see virgil just spinning. at any rate, i was required to take latin to go to major seminary. you had to learn latin. i repeated the 10th grade to take latin. it was very aggressive and quite difficult. i took latin am a three years in high school and one in college. my only regret was i did not take greek. i would not, if i had to go back, i would take more music.

i would take more mathematics. i was good at sciences. i would probably take another course in physics and chemistry. rigorous education, and the people who required me to educate myself, or prevented me from avoiding education, our fabulous -- our fabulous and what they help me do. people don't run out and say it let me take latin. you say you're required to take latin. you are required to take philosophy. you are required to take metaphysics. you're required to take ethics. as what i got. i say think offer the people who knew better than i did, and required me to be better than i would have without their invites. that is the beginning of my education.

out of that, they taught me to read more books, to think about things. to be willing to listen to people who are thinking about things. and to continue that education process. latin was like a spelling bee. back then, there was this faith that if you're given a chance to go to the right school, we could do as well as whites. we would hold our own. this was proof positive. i was the only black kid in the high school for two or three years that i was there. this was in the 1960s. his point was, this is exhibit a

that we can hold our own at any time. it was important. it was encouragement to the few people who were at meetings that their efforts were worthwhile. >> holy cross was a critical aspect of your education. surely making that difficult transition to massachusetts. you talk about that as a difficult time in america. you describe yourself at that time as an angry young man. what were you angry about? >> the same thing that every other black was saying. we had a lot of problems. race wise. the question is, how do you respond? how do you deal with it? when you are young, you do with things by what? you lash out, criticize, savings to people. you you do it in a way with a lot of emotion and a lot of passion. i think one of the values of being educated is you find out

how do you channel that passion? how do you deal with difficult things in a way that is constructive, as opposed to the way we dealt with things. >> as all the judges and lawyers know, we are still suffering with a lot of angry young men who find themselves in criminal justice systems. do you have any theory as to what the chief contributors are to that national problem that we have? >> i started mine career in washington in the early 1980s pointing out something that bothered me. the 1980 census. the breakdown of black families. it is not because i had a solution. i am not someone who tries to have a theory each year. i do not do that. i do not claim to be god or anything. but something said in those

numbers that there was a fundamental change in the structure of the black family, and the one thing that was stable, even on an extended basis was at least you had a family. he you had a lot of other problems. you had a family. when that was gone, what are you left with? i looked over data. the penetration of drugs in our lives, of addictive drugs. you can, when i read petitions, i read 9000 a year, for 21.5 years. every crime is drug-related.

from your work as a district judge, you see these young people with no families, no education. we pointed out those numbers back in the 1980s. one of the things that has happened is that if you do not toe the ideological line or narrative, then you are not listen to, for pointing out that the family members were not good. i was cast as blaming the victim. dismissing the obvious. we have a problem. the solution? no. any solution, you have to accurately set up what the problem is.

you do be willing to say what it is and try to deal with a preview go to the doctor. the doctor you want to have an accurate diagnosis of the can have a constructive and positive diagnosis. anyway, i do not have any of those solutions. my heart is broken because i worked in the inner cities. we've been trying my entire adult life to just be honest with people about it. they came with urban renewal. look at our neighborhoods. they came in with this program, and that solution, and this and that. all of these theories and programs. i go back to my neighborhood. as soon as i drive in, my heart is broken. where i grew up, i could walk to school. i knew everybody. everybody, we were poor but

proud. i would walk to the 6:00 mass three quarters of a mile in the inner-city. who would let a little kid walked three quarters of a mile in the intercity to serve the 6:00 mass today? i'm not getting into the very complicated. i am asking a simple question for you i can walk to serve the 6:00 mass with my bookbag on, and nobody ever bothered me. and you do it today question rick something has happened. i not have a theory. i do know that we should at least fess up and say that something is wrong and then deal with it and not try to turn into some kind of political fodder.

>> let's talk for a second about your time at gl. you have an open about talking about a business. i think you still have this 15 cent cigar sticker on your degree from yale. why was it unsatisfactory? >> i probably should have been more respectful of my years at yale. i took a lot of positive from yale. did i have disappointments? yes. the sticker had less to do with my experience than what i thought you would mean, how people would perceive it. that there is this assumption that when you graduate, you are a certain level. of course, we should be realistic that they were discounted.

we know why they were discounted. the $.15 was put there so that i could get a job with it. it is hard to be upset when my grandmother used to say, some doors closed, but god opens other doors. how could i complain? yale is mixed. i have a deeper appreciation for that now. i should've asked respite early on. the sticker was point -- put there out of frustration. i did everything i was supposed to do and i cannot get a job. how was i supposed to feel? i have student loans. i was frustrated. i was very upset. yielded not make it better. >> you wrote later in your opinion in a case called jenkins, you wrote "it never

ceases to amaze me that the courts are so willing to assume that anything that is predominately black must be inferior." >> it speaks for itself. it is true. our schools were closed because people said they were not as good because they were all black. i do not believe any of that stuff. i went to all black schools. i lived in all-black neighborhoods. i had a wonderful life in those neighborhoods. people think you are making it up. you are trying to paint the south anyway it wasn't. they have a narrative. i was moving back home when i stopped in dc. i still wanted to get back. my high school was not inferior. my neighborhood was not inferior. my church is not inferior.

my family was not inferior. i never believed it. i never will. i do not think you need to start from the premise if something is predominately one group or another that you can make these broad assumptions about whether or not it is inferior. if i were to ask you today what school, what university produces the largest number of black doctors, or black going to medical school, which would you you say it is? question mark -- which would you say it is? it is xavier. xavier has been considered a predominantly black school. they should ask how they do it. >> wasn't on your radar to go to a historically black college?

>> yes. i was dumb of all white schools. i was angry. 1968, dr. king had just been assassinated. i was done with it. i understand people's reactions when they are angry. i was angry. i got home, and my grandfather kicked me out of the house. the only school i could apply to was holy cross. holy cross saved me. i was going to savannah state college. >> had a that come about? >> the mythmakers that come up with these theories. it was because of my chemistry teacher. >> it is because sister mary called a friend of mine who was already at holly cross and told them to send me an application.

i got accepted. i got accepted because i had almost a straight a average. then the myth makers came up with the myth that i was recruited, i was not recruited. it was serendipity, if you're not religious that i ended up at holy cross. >> your career takes off, did you set out to be politically active? did you say i might have an opportunity as a young conservative and move up the ladder? >> i never called myself conservative, that was another putdown in the 1980's when they named us black conservatives to

show we're sort of like some vile thing that occurred. but we did not call ourselves anything. we were just people trying to think about difficult things and offer a point of view but suddenly there was a prescribed point of view. i found it fascinating. if people are told they can only go to one neighborhood that is wrong. if you're told you can go to these schools, that's wrong. but it's ok to tell people only to think certain things. that is bizarre. at any rate, i was never politically involved. i don't like politics. that's another thing, i'm interested -- i thing about things. i think about philosophies or things in that happen in society. i don't know how you can tell someone something and make them believe it. i don't like it. i certainly was not republican when i came to d.c.

i became a republican to vote for ronald reagan. i was a registered independent. but that was about it. i voted in law school -- i voted at 18 because i was from georgia. i voted for humphrey in 1968 and mcgovern in 1962 and i thought they were too conservative. \[laughter] it was again, trying to think things threw. i was more of a libertarian. i was triesing to figure things out but -- trying to figure things out but you're black you are not supposed to think about things. that's bizarre. why did we go to school? give us a the list of what we're supposed to think and that saves time. we just read, what am i supposed to think today? >> so you went from humphrey to reagan -- should we anticipate

some future -- >> no. i returned to the way i was raised. i went from -- if you want to look at the transition it was a deviation from the way i was raised then a return to the way i was raised. as my grandfather said when i was involved in all sorts of radical things my boy, i did not raise you to be like that. i did not raise you to be disrespectful, uneducated, etc. he would -- when i came home talking nonsense as he called it, he would get up and leave the room because i was so far off the charts in his mind. >> before president bush was elected had you envisioned yourself as a judge? >> oh, god no. the judge is the last thing. i did not envision myself living in washington.

i think you are called -- those of us who are former seminarians or religious they understand what i'm saying, you think you're called to do certain things. when you are called you're supposed to do it. i would say to myself just don't call me. then the president calls you dick thornberg, two of his aides called me in 1989. i forget the two at the end of the breakfast they said some people are interested in you being a judge. that was the beginning of the process. i believe when you -- when you're called, the president

calls you to do a particular job an its the right thing you are to do it. if i had to choose what i wanted to do, no i would not do this. >> do you have a dream job? >> i wanted to be priest. >> after you left -- >> no, not really. my wife and i talked about it, prayed about it, i could have made a lot of money. i could have done lots of things. but i didn't want to do that. i didn't go to law school to make money. i didn't go to law school to be famous. i went to law school to go back to georgia and do what i wanted to do to be a priest. i wanted to go to my neighborhood and be a leader. a young woman said to me yesterday that she was naive. she said i'm proudly naive. you can call it idealistic or naive. whatever.

you do well in order to do good. when you have a chance to make hard decisions, if you're called to do it, you're bound to do it. you must do it. you don't have that choice to wimp out. >> on that topic, justice thomas mass, when the controversy erupted with the anita hill statements that was a difficult thing for you and your family did you think of withdrawing? >> i never run from people who i consider or circumstances that i consider bullies. i don't believe in that. not in playing sports, you stand your ground. that did not make sense to me. you're going to do all of these things to me because you don't agree with me. thank goodness, the people in the country are better than the people who claim to be better than everybody else.

>> soon after your swearg in at the white house, you had the -- swearing in at the white house, you had the opportunity to speak with thurgood marshall. did can you share some of the things you got to talk to him about. >> he was a delight. it is interesting when people have these narratives about public people and you actually get to meet that person. the man was a delight to meet. it was supposed to be a 10- minute meeting and it lasted for two and a half hours. if you know him, he will regale you in stories. it was laughing and stories about his travels. both he and his family have been just delightful.

she is there at the court frequently and she's been a delight. >> what advice did he give you? did he talk to you about the interaction between the justices? what to expect going into the new environment? >> what is interesting did you notice that the justices are nominated the only people who don't say anything is the people who have done the job. nobody who has done the job presumes to tell anyone how to do it. it is a humbling experience. i was looking at the pictures of me when i was nominated. look at what this job has done to me. you crawl away from it. you do not presume to tell anyone else how to do it. he told me exactly the right

thing. i did what i had to do in my time and you have to do in your time. >> did he tell you anything about collegiality. one of the narratives when the justices come down with the 5-4 decisions in the hot button decisions. is the court a colleague yull place, has it been like that during your tenure at the court? >> for those who have been to the court -- for those of you haven't, the walls are about that thick. unless they have an insight that i don't have or an in road they

don't have. when you make hard decisions, of course, there's disappointment, there's probably -- you're exass per rated. i read some place where someone said justice scalia was yelling or making noise, something, everything about banking the walls. he's my next door neighbor and he was doing fine. he's a hunter, he's probably trying to figure out how to kill an unarmed animal. yeah, you're disappointed. it is a hard job. i have not seen all this. the worst that i have seen has been in the opinions, the edgy opinions. that's about it. no, i have not seen it. there are times when people get upset because i think people

work hard, they feel strongly about their-minutes on this thing. put nine of you in the room with different views and pick any hot button issue, pick abortion. put you in a room and how long do you think you can get along? throw you some issues. see lounge you can survive together. people can't sit in the room and talk about it, they are not making the decision, they just have an opinion. they storm away from the dinner table, storm out of the restaurant, stop speaking each other. they are not making the decision, they just have an opinion. people in the court, at my time, at least think the constitution, the country, the process of the court is much more important than they are. they somehow keep it together to decide cases appropriately and

to get along with each other in a civil way. >> any of the justices particularly close friends? >> justice scalia and justice ginsberg are very close. i tend to be more of an train vert and -- intravert. i'm close to justice scalia but not as close as justice ginsburg. they are very dear friends. i think people are very respectful there. they are very kind but people have different schedules and different lives. i like opera but i like opera on the radio so i don't have to go. \[laughter] some people like to go to the kennedy center. i'm a nebraska corn husband kerr fan and there's not -- husker fan.

there's not a lot of those around here. i'm close to my kids. i'm very, very close to my wife. if it requires me to leave her that is a nonstarter. >> did you expect to see an african american president during your lifetime? did you think that would happen? >> oh, yeah. i always thought there would be black coaches, black heads of universities. maybe, again, as i said i'm naive. but the thing i always knew it would have to be a black president who was approved by the elites, the media because anybody they don't agree with they would take apart. that will happen with virtually you pick your person, any black person that says something that is not a prescribed things they expect from a black person will be picked part. pick anyone, not me, who decided

not to go along with it there's a price to pay. aalways assumed it would be somebody that the media has to agree with. >> have you met president obama? have you had a chance to speak with him personally or in passing? >> passing, he visited the court. i don't do a lot of washington and i'm not into politics. i shook hands with him at the inauguration. he's very polite. but i had no in depth conversation. >> was that a courtesy to all the justices or you -- >> to everyone. >> did president clinton do that? >> we were at yale together so i knew him better. in recent years, they stop. the president-elect will stop by and shake hands with the members of the court and meet us as a group. >> do you see, obviously, you and president obama have

different opinions on things. do you have any common ground on things with him that you could share with us? >> i have -- >> do you want to take the fifth? >> that's hard to say. what common ground did i have with president bush, 43. i'm not into politics. i don't like politics. i do my job. i have common ground with some of the appointees say with justice ginsberg or justice kagan. we're doing the same thing. but as politics, i just don't do politics. i don't like politics. >> do you avoid intention talley in terms of media, a lost judges don't keep up with the news the way they did when they were practicing law. >> i don't like politics. i'm just done.

i like history, i like things of substance. i don't understand politics. i don't understand scuba diving. you know, when i think of scuba diving i think of drowning. i'm not against it, i'm not going under water. >> in a minute, we're going to ask questions that have been supplied by students. i do want to ask you this justice thomas, all of the current justices on the court attended an ivy league law school. do you think it is healthy to have that kind of diversity for justices from smaller universities? >> finally, you're on things i

like to talk about. i agree with that. i think we should have people from other law schools. it is all harvard and yale and justice ginsberg graduated from columbia but also attended harvard. they are wonderful, wonderful people. they are talented, good people. but the -- i do think -- i've been all over the country. there's more people, there's smart people. this school was started for immigrants. it is like holy cross college. there is something valuable about these people who live in these little neighborhoods and work their way out. i tend to hire kids from modest backgrounds and smaller schools. my lead law clerk was from l.s.u. i've had clerks from rutgers, george mason, georgia.

i like clerks from modest backgrounds. i'm from a modest backgrounds. they are special. they keep at it despite of the odds. get up every day, nobody gives them a break but they keep going. that is something special about that kid. this past weekend -- i'm very much involved with an organization, one of your students was in that. these kids come from very bad circumstances and yet, their grade point average as a group, the 107 scholars is like 3.97 or something. some rare grade point average. these kids live in homeless shelters, their parents are drug addicts. what kind of resolve does it take to keep going? it would be wonderful to have those kids as members of the court. i think they would have a different perspective and add something to the court.

>> speaking of this school, you mention in the book that you frequently prayed to the holy spirit when you were faced with difficult and challenging times. why was the holy spirit important in your life? >> it is hard for me when you say "the priest" i always thought of that suicide the holy ghost. i'm trying to be modern. i'm not trying to very hard. i do have an ipad. that's only because it was forced upon me. i just think -- i'm one of these people who still believes it is through grails that you do lots of things. -- grace that you do lots of things. when i go home and i was angry and upset and fighting with my grandfather she would pull me aside and say son, say your prayers.

or i would have problems and say son, turn it over the lord. it was always the same answer. i didn't have any political transformation. i just went back home. if you just read my book you will see i simply went back and embraced the legacy they gave me and part of that is the way we do things and the faith we have. part of that is, of course, is serenity. so as you say, let the holy ghost speak through me. i was at mass, the feast of the assumption, which was oddly celebrated on monday. but the theme was humility.

we have to be humble to receive this. i think it is very important. it is important in the way we do things. that is as deep as i can explain it but it is all important. >> we have a few questions from some of the students, justice thomas, so i want to read a couple of these. the first one is one of our all- star third year day students. did the court's recent decision upholding the affordable care act produce any hard feelings among the justice us because there were such strong views on the subject? >> no. >> ok, check that off. >> you know, it would be enormously prideful and presumptuous of me to assume that i have the right answer. i have an opinion. i do not have the gospel. i give it my best shot and that

is the way i approach the job. i try to be candid with you. was there hard feelings? no. i don't have hard feelings about a lot of things. if i was going to have hard feelings it would be on race issues. then you wouldn't let me in this room, ok? that's a reason why we offload these things. i don't have enough -- i don't think that it is appropriate for me to be angry with people who have a different opinion. read my dissents i respect your right to have a different opinion. in this society, think about it, as much as -- i just read when something is said about me, most of them are white, they assume what they know what i think because i'm black.

they are upset with me because i don't think what they think i should think. isn't that bizarre? i'm not going to follow that and say i disrespect justice ginsberg or justice breyer or justice scalia if they disagree with me. i respect their right to have a different opinion. >> this question is from a second year student. >> are you outing people? >> yes, i am. they are in class. this one is always asked. the media has made a big production about you not speaking in court. repeatedly a two second comment you made made national news. what is your philosophy about justices at oral argument? >> my philosophy is never watch it, you never hear about it. this is the first i heard about that. thank you.

i don't follow it much of this stuff. i think that we have become -- when i first went on the court there would be a series of questions by one member of the court. others would listen as this person asked a few questions in succession and had a veers of mini conversations. that is helpful. it allowed people -- each to have a turn to talk. today, it is just -- oh my gosh. everybody has a question. i don't have a question about everything. there are some things you let go. but i just think there are too many questions. i think we have capable advocates and we should let the capability advocates talk. >> that is an old fashioned view, right? >> the 1990's. >> it is true.

in the past there were far less questions. >> does it make impossible to judge if --? >> is it more of a show now? i remember being a student in the late 1980's and you can walk to the court with your jeans, t- shirt, and sit there and listen to a couple of arguments. now there is a massive humanity, it is very formal. is that a cultural shift? >> i've said enough. i do not think what we're doing is necessary. if you go to argentina, we were there visiting their supreme court a few years ago. the members of the court -- i'm using the numbers i remember i could be wrong. a couple hundred cases a year and i think they have two arguments a year. they have two oral arguments a

year. so if you look at the courts of appeals, you're on the court of appeals. what percentage of your cases decided without arguement? >> about 75%. >> i rest my case. >> a second year student matt asks, you mention in your book that you pray to pope francis, were surprised that the pope chose that name. >> i'm more surprised by the latter than the former. that's why i don't say anything. i can be a smart alec, that is what got me on the national news. anyway, no -- i don't know. i don't keep up with these things. i'm glad they seem to have a good man as pope. i don't know. i just go to church. >> here's a question from bridge get -- a third year student.

do you believe the same-sex marriage that this is the sort of issue should be tackling rather than the legislative branch or the states? >> i'm not going to say anything about that. >> a for effort anyway. >> i shouldn't -- there's no way i can comment on that. i'll be back in the national news. >> well, ok let me try this one. >> nice try. >> you live in virginia and married to your wife, a white woman and the supreme court struck down a virginia law that prohibited an interracial marriage was the court right to consider that issue? >> that that was a interracial classification case. that is pretty much it.

i try to, if you go back and look at some of the things i have written i have tried to talk about racial classify case. we have to be careful. some things we're careful about classifying people by race. why? because we like classifying people i will racial classification. some people like to segregate people by race. this is another racial classification. it says, this is right at the heart of the 14th amendment. this is what it says. this is what it was meant to deal with. i know this is leading -- trying to lure me -- >> that's what we're trying to do. >> i've been doing this a long time. you grow up in the inner cities you hear a lot of guys and people try to sell you a lot of stuff.

>> as you mentioned and those who read the supreme court's opinions know you are an extremely polite center, certainly, the most polite. in a case called kelo involving property rights you wrote something has gone seriously wrong with this court's interpretation of the constitution. citizens are safe from the government in their homes but the homes themselves are not. that struck me than the typical justice thomas. was that a case that you felt particularly strongly about? >> i said seriously awry not seriously wrong. i'm nitpicking. no stronger than other cases. i took a lot of property law

glass law school. property is for poor people it is something you did have, particularly in the south. so i tried to understand property. who do you think would be most who do you think would be most vulnerable in taking these cases? it well-heeled real-estate lawyer? a well-heeled businessman? or a poor person? read you think they would build a highway, to a poor neighborhood order to neighborhood? where do you think they would let people have an industrial development? i think that we should be very, that careful with words change, when use becomes purpose. what is the purpose versus the use? can a