some vehicles can be put back into action if you are able to recover them, but that is a significant number. the bigclosing, challenge for the rebels and to some extent, they have met it over time, as they have to keep face with the regime or get ahead of it. behind the fall regime in a military sense. it looked in june like they were definitely doing that. more recently it looks like they studied them selves and are coming back. the the single greatest weakness is the disaster at the political echelon and the failure to have any kind of effect of overall real national military strategy. these are weaknesses that cannot be cured.

these can be cured either by the .rrival of a figure with that, i will conclude. >> thanks for that, jeff. thanks to all of you for coming out today for lunch. bitgoing to deal a little with the opposition politically where jeff left off in his presentation. i've been dealing with the syrian opposition now for about .3 years it has changed a lot over time. disorganized it is

. they are unable to plan. all of these things are true. but does not mean they are not worth investigating. everyone has different theories about why this is. some people have argued that everyone else funds different groups and they have different clients inside of the country and it is what is coming the division. there might be something to those theories. he goes back between the older thesition and inside of group. there is a certain psychological aspect that is overlooked. an agent is to my segment of

this work with it. people whou have emerge from the living under to radical system like the assad regime which is unbelievably brutal and power is arbitrary. the fact of the matter is oftentimes, we noticed this this back before the uprising began when they begin to see the light, began to emerge from the malaise. malaise gives way to grandiosity . i think that is what really drives a lot of members within the syrian opposition.

oftentimes you meet with them at conferences and they will talk more about them and their individual aspirations than the killing of body, party, syrian opposition as a whole. characteristice of the members of the opposition than what is coming out today. a lot of people in the region then take advantage of it. as problematic as that is, special divisions have created exactly the kind of headless up addition that syria president bashar al-assad cannot capitated. they have proven the achilles' heel. it is also one of the survival strategies and over time, as many of you have watched over the course of the development of the uprising in syria, the

regime has unsuccessfully early played a game of whack a mole -- has unsuccessfully played a game of whack a mole. unfortunately, with considerable assistance,sian political cover, the regime has been able to continue doing this and it has led to over 100,000 killed in the country and no end in sight. my peace talks a little bit about looking back. i spent a lot of time opposite opposition members from the the beginning of the uprising going forward. it was not just in the western capitals or istanbul or some of the arab capitals. i spent a tremendous amount of time in border regions with the civilian opposition as well as the armed opposition from a very early stage and watched their development.

talks a little bit about the development of the serial national council. it is now part of the serial opposition coalition and its development into its own problems with personalities as well as coming up with a common platform and being able to unable to overcome personal and they continue today and to the group. one liberal, the other the muslim brotherhood in the third this group. overtime, especially early on, they did not spend enough time in the border regions and they lost traction inside of the country both with first the peaceful protesters inside of syria and then over time with the armed groups who began firing back at the assad regime loss attempts to put down the uprising in the fall of 2011 forward.

this piece also deals considerably with the attempt by community toonal a get it to reform. the regional powers as well as the united states was to get them to branch out inside of the country and to essentially pack this with more members from inside the country than those who were primarily in exile. that attempt happened in doha, qatar, in november of last year. mixed success or failure however you want to look at it. their participation inside of many of theseon andwere inside the country

were instead hand-picked by many of the same currents that were inside the smc. and this expanded but it did not as per thegh outlines and intentions of a number of those within this. opposition who wanted to see the body come together but also some of the western and arab patrons. a little-known story that happened alongside this meeting in november 2012, there is a parallel meeting in doha of the provincial military council leaders and they sort of had a parallel meeting in order to try to organize the different groups inside of syria into something coherent.

followed by ans official meeting on december 7 in turkey to form what was called the supreme military council or what is today known as the smc which is headed by the general. earlywere a couple of signs that there was a lot about side fingerprints on the smc. for example, the 230 members present that day suddenly agreed by consensus to the 30 member leadership body that currently heads the smc and for someone who tracks this. opposition, that is nothing short of a miracle. but actually, one of the main reasons why it was formed so quickly was because of the presence and involvement of western and arab intelligence agencies and there were reasons for that. i don't say that they are not justified. there were a lot of concerns on

the weapons going into syria were indiscriminate than they were going to extremist within the opposition and there was some sort of organized structure ran by channeling all of the weapons through one source it would bring to the army units together inside of the country. today, it is a blend of two regional models. qatar-based provincial military model and the other was the saudi-backed five fronts model. and if you look at the diagram which will find inside this put together by the syrian support group it outlines all of the different fronts and also its membership. glance, if you look at the membership of the smc, it seems like a foreign government's dream a coherent linear opposition structure needed to arm and insurgency to hopefully take it down and

organized into operation branches, intelligence, supply, equipment, even transitional justice of all things. that is according to reach one of the fronts and i encourage you to look at them. politically, in terms of the individuals listed them all of them have quite different political orientations. the structure was originally formed in discussions of 2012 have been behind closed doors between members of the syrian opposition and western arab intelligence agencies. at that time, they were not prevalent in the oppositions of the structure we see here today that you see in the diagram is a collection of nationalist battalions that could be secular or mildly islamist but i merrily focused on syria but mixed together also with those of a different

orientation. one of the giant pink elephants is theroom on the smc role of this. originally, this was not seen as a bad idea because there was an attempt that was quite thoughtful that the important thing was to co-opt some of the moderates who only had aspirations for an islamic state within sea area into the structure so that over time they could then be moderated, dealt with, incorporated into an resistance.tence -- that would have had a better chance of happening had the structure been armed and financed at the time it was originally constructed. i can point you to the deliberations in some of the stories about the deliberations inside of the american administration, specifically hillary clinton and other backings of the army of the structure in general. taken.th was not

over time, the syrian opposition continued to fight against the assad regime and quite fermentable en did a good job. fromhad to rely on patrons north africa and beyond to sustain i nancy and weaponry. financing and weaponry. primarilyoutside of the group, but they grew in stature and an overall firepower so the situation has changed considerably since then and now there is a real question in looking at the smc about what to do with it. president obama and the band roads have announced that originally in times of enforcing the red line on the serious and chemical weapons use and this most recent incident was not the first, the united states would support its military

were the supreme military council specifically so we are not arming. but actually the supreme military council. as you have seen in the press, that has come out that there has been a lot of complaints about the late delivery of those weapons. there are several reasons for that. one is arguments over how effect of this can be because the fight in serious has ended up in the division of the country. some call it a stalemate and whatever we provide to them would not leave to the toppling of the assad regime but only sustaining the fight. the other more enduring argument has been supplying the smc wholesale that could and likely would leave those weapons into falling into the hands of the extremists. as it is currently construct did, that is a distinct possibility. however, i am not rejecting this

as a vehicle for supporting the opposition but rather, and we talked about this in the paper, and i think this is also partially born from the findings of my colleague, what we instead need going forward, which i think is the wisest choice, it is the one slowly being adopted i the administration and accounts for the trickle out of assistance is the discriminant support and arming of different members within the smc whom we have already existing relations and those that are also more of a secular, nationalist orientation that are not against u.s. interests not only in syria at the region as a whole. it's very difficult stuff. it's a political game using military means but it is one we are going to the play ever so carefully if we are going to win the overall battle inside of syria. my winning the battle, what i mean is eventually getting

president assad to leave the scene and hopefully having at the end of these negotiations between three different parts of piece in thehave a foreign affairs that outlines these facto division into different groups to get these pieces to eventually come back together but that is a very medium or long-term goal at this point. i talk a little bit about in the piece about a couple of the examples of what has happened so the smc.rning there has been an attempt using croatian arms financed by saudi arabia to finance a number of the more moderate elements inside of syria. arms called the croatian episode or incident in which the weapons were provided and within a very short time, some of them ended up in the hands of extremists.

now just to be clear, the weapons were not given to them as i hold but some groups within the smc were armed. it is not a hard test. nevertheless, a number of weapons that were supplied according to evidence that was taken by the internet and is explained by my self and aaron sell it, they ended up in the al qaeda affiliate currently active inside of syria. argue in the end is a cautious middle way forward. that this in the construct of the overall enforcement of the red line seems to be getting ahead of ourselves but i assure you whatever happens in the next 48 hours or so, the war in syria will go on for a very long time and from a policy angle, what we have gone from is having a serious that was a u.s. state

sponsor of terrorism into three terroristwhich organizations are not only present but ascendant. situation,gy, that which some have written recently in "the new york times" and this worked how against each other and the united states, that only works if they are all u.s. allies. that spill over is already occurring whether it is in the record of refugees fighting across the border, sectarian .ension around and about syria what happened there is not going to stay there. he has talked about the impact

of the syrian crisis overall on our regional allies and while i realize that the strikes appear to enforce the chemical weapons redlined, and i i supported that even before the president outlined it, whatever happens out of that, the president is going to obviously be talking about the punitive measures involved. overall, i think the president is going to have to address and the government will have to address the strategic threats that are coming out of the serious crisis. ladies and gentlemen, the meltdown of this country is not going to end anytime soon. if i could tell you which way it's going, i would, but i cannot. continues, then level of threats to the united states and its allies are going to the root. therefore, more assertive u.s. action whether it is discriminately arming the smc as

a vehicle to supporting the unarmed opposition seems the best road ahead. it will be a careful and difficult effort that i think it's one that we are up for and being more assertive now instead of waiting for others in the region or adversary to take our place would be the best way forward. thank you very much. >> aaron could not be here today so i am kind of standing in for him as a poor man's aaron. i have been asked to talk about the implications of potential u.s. military operations in syria. when undertaking these kind of exercises, i'll always find it

useful to refer to the quotation from the famous theorist of the first, thed supreme, the most far-reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish the kind of war in which they are embarking. us to ask that leads if the united states does act in response to the escalated use of chemical weapons, what are our likely goals? howery likely to go about achieving these goals? what are the prospects for success? how is syria and their allies likely to respond? in considering american policy object does, if they do resort to the use of force, there are a number of these that one could spell out potentially.

first, simply making a statement. secretary of state cary has talked about the need for accountability and, in its own way, the appropriate action , kind of, itimply would stand on its own as as whiteesponding, house spokesperson jay carney said, america responding to an action that need their response. to restore credibility. the third is to alter the balance of forces between the regime to set conditions for evil -- either a diplomatic settlement or options of the three or, finally, a decapitation and regime change although jay carney says it is off the table because we are not seeking a regime change. even trying to alter the balance of forces is something in which the administration is not likely

to pursue. other than making a statement, i think the likely minimal goal of any kind of military action would be to restore credibility and deter future chemical weapons use. how might we go about achieving this? the first thing that is important to say that based on newspaper descriptions of the kind of strike we can expect, and they are talking about the class destroyers in the east mediterranean being the likely source of the strike, each of them carries a couple dozen tomahawk land attack missiles and they're probably accompanied by one or two attack submarines and they have potentially much larger numbers of tomahawks on board and some of them can carry up to 150. you are perhaps talking a strike of 100-200 tomahawk missiles. when you think about it in terms of the size of the warheads on the missiles, you are talking about something that really

30-35 soo between you're not talking about a very big strike here, first of all. likelysult, you're not to significantly degrade the syria military capabilities and therefore i would argue if this is the kind of the strike that the administration feels comfortable with, they should focus on not degrading capabilities but altering the risk calculus and achieving a mainly psychological effect. the only way to really accomplish this, maybe not the only way but the most desirable way is by targeting key regime units. a 12the syrian army is plus division army but in prosecuting their fight against the opposition, they have only more or less used re-division, the republican guard, and some special forces units. these are key to the survival of

the regime, defending them against a coup. and the fourth armored division of the guard have been deeply indicated in the use of chemical weapons against the syria people. hit headquarters of these units at fixed sites. conceivably, it would be therable, even though tomahawks are not the best way or even a good way to do it. be able be desirable to to the short a large number of tanks and artillery, but most important it is to kill the senior leadership of these units or senior members of this unit. the problem is even if you destroy large numbers of tanks and artillery of these units, only three divisions of the 12 in the military are really committed to combat. you conceivably have a large stockpile of tanks and artillery

pieces that are not being used. maybe a lot of them have not been maintained and are not optional, they could cannibalize these other units. are is critical, what they short of it is loyal soldiers. it is much more important to kill experienced, committed troops, the more senior the better, because they are probably related by blood and marriage to senior officials in the regime but the problem is now since we telegraphed our preparations to strike, they are probably not going to be in their headquarters or by their tanks. we know this where time and time again we hit empty headquarters and even when we tried to bomb chemical weapons facilities, they were out in the field rather than in the bunkers. of the lack of advanced

warning, i think we have a limited ability to accomplish at thisct above this point. in addition, i'm not sure the administration would go for this, but in order to do it effectively, you have to rely on combat aircraft and tomahawks are not the tool to do a lot of this. problem in terms of the efficacy of this kind of strike. also, considering how we fashioned the strike, if we are to go down this path, that we not respond in an asymmetric way to serial provocations because it enables the regime to calculate risk and this is something we consistently sell into the trap with the iraqis in the 1990's. they would challenge us in the --fly zones and we would really, they had an almost inexhaustible supply of air defense systems and personnel.

they were not high on the priority list. they were not so important for the regime and they could afford to lose them if they wanted to challenge us and likewise with their wmd facilities. not to respond in asymmetric matter but to hit other sites that are critically important for the regime. toin, units that are key prosecuting the fight against the opposition. i think it would also be desirable if we could do it to intimate that whatever we do is not a parting shot but an opening salvo. there is more yet to come. again, the problem is the administration has, for good reason, been sober lot and to get directly involved and they have telegraphed their intent any military action will be seen as likely a one off event or at least their preparation would be that it is a one off event.

therefore, psychologically, the regime in damascus will feel like they can write it out and they will be free to continue with the degradation afterwards. if there would be a way to intimate that more is yet to come, that would be desirable. you try to degrade the air defenses to set the conditions for future strikes if you use manned aircraft in the future. in awill not be operating less hostile air defense environment. i think it is also important in terms of changing the psychology have supporting diplomatic moves to any military action. all the things the saudi's are doing to pull away the russians, good luck. i'm really skeptical, but i think these kinds of efforts are desirable to the degree that they may be plant seeds of doubt about the reliability of the russians because we know in coso

though one of the things that caused them to eventually cave was the loss of russian support. and anythinglly that shows doubt in the mind of the regime in damascus about that is important. iran is a harder target and we are less likely to peel them away, but i think we have a great information opportunity that one of the deep wounds in iranian society is the fact that they were victims of chemical warfare in the international community was silence. most powerful the talking point in terms of domestic opinion and world opinion and i think we should relentlessly make the point that they are supporting a regime againstemical weapons civilians. i wonder if they are getting advice from their iranian allies about how to most effect if we use them. this is a great talking point we

should be pressing. i do not know if it will have an effect on iranian policy. let me make a few points on lessons from the past we should keep in mind if we go down the military route. are almosttrikes never a one-off deal. it will be very important for the regime in damascus to try to once againthey will violate the red line perhaps by once again resuming the use of chemical weapons though maybe on a very low level which will put the u.s. administration in a dilemma. do you strike again in response to a local use of chemical weapons that killed maybe 10 or 15 people? they will be able to make the point that, was that your best shot? it did not effect our conduct. we also notice from our experience in dealing with iraq

in the 1990's but it was a constant struggle, a cat and mouse game, and the israelis have had similar issues with dealing with a rocket fire from hezbollah after they withdrew from lebanon and it was only until the israelis engaged in very far-reaching military that they were successful at least in dealing with the threat from hezbollah and had missed -- mixed results but i do not see the u.s. engaging in those kinds of very far-reaching military operations at this point. the second lesson is to get it right from the start and do not try to deter or manage the problem on the cheap. again, this is one of the lessons from iraq in the 1990's. what finally put together all of the elements of a successful course of policy was operation

desert fox but that was intended as a parting shot. we have given up on the inspections at that time and i see it really is a face-saving effort to hit them hard as we kind ofking away to provide political cover for the administrative decision to give up on you and weapons inspections. atwould have been better those kinds of operations, if we carried them out at the beginning of our course of diplomacy because maybe the decade, we would have had an easier time with you and weapons inspections if we started with those kinds of operations. a few points about the nature of the challenges we are likely to face and the type of serious response before i wrap up here. advanced warning of a u.s. strike, key personnel are not likely to be in the headquarters that may be targeted if we were to target senior headquarters. by relying on cruise missiles,

there are limits to what you can accomplish simply because even though our most advanced cruise missile has the ability to be up dated in flight, the intelligence that it is based on his very often several hours old. a pilot overflying a target looking through a targeting pod can, in real time, determine what is on the ground that they will hit. there are limits to what you can accomplish it the enemy is moving things around on a frequent basis which i assume the serious might do. limited strike of the type we are planning would preclude the u.s. from hitting assets that the serious might rely on for retaliation such as surface to surface missiles or chemical weapon stock piles. newspaper reporting indicates that we are not likely to hit chemical weapon stock house for fear of collateral damage, that may be disinformation or the truth that we might yet find out

in a few days. clearly based on our experience in targeting weapons of mass destruction type targets, we thatfrom experience accurate and timely intelligence is vital and our track record in this regard is very uneven. we also have to consider the fact that reports have said that they have been consolidating chemical weapons arsenals, moving them around in order to prevent the operation -- opposition from gaining them so even if we had a perfect picture at the start, once they start moving around, it makes it more difficult and even if we know which bases they consolidated them on, we don't know which buildings they are in. that could also complicate targeting. the advanced telegraphing of the possibility that the u.s. would strike, that's possible it has been disbursed on the eve of the 91 war. in terms of serious response, the last thing that serious need this to open another front.

they still have their hands full dealing with the opposition and therefore, i think their response will be limited at best. i would simply note that israel attacked serially in 2007 when they bombed its reactor and four times this year without an overt response from syria get. they have been pretty restrained in their statements except for statements that they will defend themselves but there is no bravado to the statements that they will set the region on fire. the potential for proxy terrorism is much more limited. our ability to stop the act and the today has been much better since 9/11. repeated, intermittent, and limited the use of chemical weapons is there most likely response to bombing. to make the case that you bombed us, are you going to bomb us again for 10 or 20 people killed by chemical what is? they will put the administration

on the dilemma. i want to wrap this up now, but i think for various reasons, i do not see them acting in a big way in response to a u.s. strike. as for theon, possibility of a u.s. military strike, my recommendation is to do it right or don't do it at morend that means probably expansive strike ban is being considered by the current administration. us to do don't expect one off because it will be very important for a sought to show that he is undefeated and he will continue to test the red line. finally, action of the type that the administration appears to be considering i think can only modestly, at best, reduce the potential threat of chemical topons into the opposition really change the balance of forces in a positive way requiring that we finally take

seriously the possibility of arming the opposition and this would, in the long run, be the kind of response that potentially really matters. thank you. >> thank you. the one privilege of sharing an event like this as i get to ask the first question. let me ask our panelists. i listen to you and i hear about a very decentralized if not disorganized opposition and i hear about a regime increasingly relying on your regular forces. limited actions that the united states is likely to take. what i was running through my mind was, are you saying the united states cannot make much of a difference in this conflict? not only the united states will not do much to influence it but

really, nothing short of dramatic u.s. action will have much of an impact. >> can you all hear me? i take that as a yes. i think the limits of u.s. power are exaggerated. i think we can do a lot. even on a limited strike, provided it is not just a wrap on a knuckles or a symbolic tomahawk of a few places in damascus. that can have some important effects on the situation. starting with what would be necessary and should have been done for a long time, real military assistance to the rebels. and this requires that any

all of that, as andrew outlined. it might migrate into the hands of people we don't like and you don't like us, but you have to think about the importance of the object is here. if you assume getting assad out of power and defeating the iranians and syria are important object gives, then certainly those types of risks are worth taking. we could do a lot to help the rebels beyond just giving them the man type aircraft and antitank missiles and there are lots of things we can do in the way of training and advice on how to operate and help them form real command structures and providing them with effective logistics for the forces and so one. we could do that in the future and we should have been doing that for some time. that will not guarantee the democratic future society in the syria that everybody wants but it would at least help influence in that direction and give the

u.s. some ability to influence the situation on the ground post-assad. in termsdo a lot more of direct military intervention. this is something also that should have been contemplated and undertaken long before where we are now. we can still do it. as i outlined in my comments. relies on firepower, significantly. we can reduce that i or power. we can stop the serious air force from killing civilians on a daily basis and we can destroy the syria surface missile forces. we can degrade their command and control. we can't take away a lot of the advantages they enjoy with direct military action but to say that the united states does not have the ability to influence the situation in syria is wrong. we could expedite the removal of the regime significantly, but

can we fix syria? can we ensure a democratic future? we cannot. we can certainly do some important things there. >> just briefly, to echo jeff's , in the end, it's a situation where the u.s. could do a lot more but again, it is not just through direct or indirect intervention although i agree with the way jeff set it up, it is just in terms of understanding what our is. ,he big problem that i see particularly with syria, we are used to dealing with serious through its regime and we had a not political relationship, but our intelligence services knew each other very well and it was very when watching operations

of the u.s. embassy in damascus over the years when i was there, we knew them quite well and weak or operated with them and that structure, the one we are very familiar with and those that go around it, that system became destabilized and again it gets back to the demographics that have changed in the country. if you look at all of the videos that come out of the fighting units, you find very few gray hairs among those taking shots against the assad regime. there are those who were born in thehorrific 10 years of massacre the serial was among the top 20 fastest growing populations on the planet. the numbers have just radically changed. when you meet with these groups inside of syria or in the serial in border regions, it is a new set of elites. the people inside of syria now matter. what do we do with them? do we ignore them and pretend

that the current streaming through the opposition is not there and just let them fester and grow? or do we try to influence that environment? i don't think that is part of u.s. policy in the syria or syria policy during this crisis. it needs to be part of our u.s.- middle east policy in general. how will we deal with people. they are a factor in this country. economics matter. the social aspect matter. it will not just the state to state. in much more assertive, smarter role combined with some of the options that jeff has outlined would be the right move going ahead. >> i agree with the comments of my colleagues here. based on what has been reported in the media, based on

and briefings by senior officials, but the administration seems to be considering is not likely to achieve the desired object is so i was just simply saying, if we want to accomplish our as limitingefined back, we need to think of another way of going about it but i think we can do more to cane the environment but we hopefully try to set conditions for the success of the opposition but in the end it is up to them, but we have an important role to play in helping them get there. >> thank you. do we have any questions? right there. >> i have a question for mr. eischen stott. eisenstadt.

what evidence do you have the your claim that this. government has used chemical weapons? of all, i'm waiting to see what the human inspectors say and i'm looking to see what the u.s. government has to say in this regard and i think that is why the administration has actually said, it's interesting. they say that they are not waiting for the u.n. report because they feel that they have and detailed intelligence it will be revealed later this week. again, i don't recall, i don't remember exactly how it was said , they would say allegations and i would wait to see what the report says personally. i don't recall exactly what i said in my presentation, but i would like to see exactly what the evidence the u.s. government

has to put on the table, but to be honest with you, given that this administration was elected in part due to their criticism of the preceding administration for going to war without adequate intelligence related to weapons of mass destruction, i would hope they would cross all their i's's and dot when it comes to declaring war but when the secretary of state says there is no doubt that they used chemical weapons, i would invest a high degree and confidence in that. again, i want to see what kind of reports they come out with in the coming days. >> can i wait in the? -- weigh in?\ it is something we call the loose nukes program.

if it is out, we will blame the person who reduced the weapon because every government that produces them has a responsibility under international law to keep weapons in their control. this. government has lost control of chemical weapons and they are used by the rebels, it is the fault of this. government. they have a responsibility to keep control over chemical weapons they produce and it is in their territory. if they have lost control, they need to bring this to the attention of the international community and i assume we will be assisting them in the control of those weapons but the more important question we should ask about what happened in serial is were chemical weapons used in? if the answer is yes, that's the responsibility of serious government. >> we don't have 100% forensic evidence yet of regime

to useity or whatever chemical weapons. we have everything but that. we do not have ncis damascus so we will have to wait for the u.n. people to come back with a report. they will say that yes, they have been used and it looks like this agent and we kind of know that. to somee is resolving degree of certainty or high probability that the regime did it or somebody else did it. regime, theyt the have a very formidable about the warfare capability. methods? they have the units, the concepts, the training to conduct chemical warfare attacks. the opportunity was there and they also had some reasonable

real rationale for striking. the're having trouble in damascus area with rebel forces. they have been trying to clear the very areas that were struck for months and have not been successful and in that fighting, they have lost troops, tanks, armored vehicles, personnel from their allies without any significant progress. the rebels were having their own successes in those areas. that is plenty of stuff points to the regime having done it. scale, all kinds of things. it takes a leap of faith to believe that it was not the regime -- more than that. it takes fantasy to believe that it was not the regime, but we will see. it is not 100%, but we have a

lot of reporting of actual intelligence evidence, imagery, and so one that definitely points to regime use. beginning, the u.n. team is not allowed to buy current mandate negotiated over five months to negotiate with this. government over the sites that would be inspected. it is not allowed to assess blame for who used the weapons. no matter what they say in a few days, it is not that body. the team and not say who used the weapons. >> my name is larry. for theion is generally speakers.

in thinking about the stratification of the seer in opposition movements, i am more theect the on stratification of the serious government. basharson i say that is al-assad was basically a pinch- hitter. his father was grooming his eldest son to be his successor. he was killed in an auto accident. and quicklyht back groomed to try to take over. . would like your comments is he truly in charge? does he rule or does he ran? different centers of power, different military, that view about letting him off the luck in terms of responsibilities for the actions inside of one of the most

centrally organized political systems in the world held until about 2005. and in that conference, most of those figures were retired from his father's reign and then there were just the new figures. then of course we have the crisis in lebanon. to could he have decided kill him, made the political decision, whatever. they thought that there were other groups of people behind the scenes. one of whom was the president's brother-in-law who is married to his sister. that went on for a wild.

the only reason syria would be important is to hold back those weapons. this went along in the uprising again. they continued to fire on their own people. it continued. that it a lot of talk was hard-liners behind the regime. after 15 years of the shower al- assad being in power, this who he is. based on my knowledge and we just released a study at the institute about the current structure of the regime, it is completely centralized in the assad's family hands and whatever goes on behind the scenes is within the family members and i think that means

whatever happens regarding the regime and syria, they are complicit. >> banks. this is a question for mike. you talk about the use of combat aircraft as a possible desirable option. what is your take on serious air defense? some people seem to suggest it is rather fermentable. do you think it would be theentable in terms of somewhat the grated capability? >> it's really hard to know. on paper, clearly they have very extensive air defense, very dense along the west side of the country, the populated part of damascus,y, around aleppo, homs, the coastline. people would what

call legacy systems from the soviet system's era that is rather dated. that are some newer ones could pose a significant risk. i think the main question that i know ask is given that we that the ground forces have desertionignificant and absentee is a manned as a result they can really only rely on out of the 12 in the army, are the air defense is suffering from the same problem? we just don't know. they did successfully shoot down a turkish phantom that was apparently on a reconnaissance flight sometime ago. they are viable, but in terms of how effect do, it is just unknown. and think we're pretty good capability to deal with it at but in the past we have lost aircraft in very small numbers

for some of these older systems and as a result, they remain a potential threat. it's probably not a main threat -- it's not as great as per trade at it is something that we have to take very seriously. we cannot wish it away, for sure. you have to account for those systems and deal with them. know that the system overall suffered a lot of degradation since the war and the rebels have overrun at least two facilities, the main strategic system. they have overrun a number of and support facilities. we also know that many of the air defense units are involved in a ground war. they serve as strong points to help the regime control areas and many of the wider have beenft systems

committed to combat in support of this. army. that whateverem its state was at the beginning 2011, it ismarch less, maybe a lot less, than it was. mikethere are things that pointed out and these are systems we have all gone against successfully, with the exception of maybe one particular system. beginning, youhe cannot wish it away. it has to be accounted for in any kind of prudent planning process. >> they conducted multiple operations over syria and perhaps at its margins, certainly within the range of many of their in and alsooing mentioned earlier that they had

made strikes and there was no retaliation, just rhetorical. the stories of the strikes are coming out of washington, not out of syria. you read in the israeli media, they lead stories -- the u.s. lead stories. what is going on with that? >> who knows? some speculation is that people at the state department who are upset that wants us to have a more forward leaning policy and therefore, leaking in order to shame in the administration into action and others may be -- there are people concerned israeli action will lead to escalation. to therefore, they want deter this rallies from acting. i do not know. maybe it is all or none of the above. maybe people who cannot keep

their mouths closed. who knows. >> first of all my congratulations on an amazing study. , the question of retaliation. we'll talk more next week. seems tos media, it imply for one statement if there was a strike, they would not respond. or if there was something and at undermining the regime they would. >> with regard to has blood -- hezbollah, you should be answering this. syria, they do not need to open a second front at this point, they have their hands full. as a result, the response would be very restraint.

-- the same for has bola hezbollah. they are already engaged in a shadow war. kill and tried to conduct an attack against israelis. they are already engaged in these types of activities. strike causedi them to ramp it up? has not been acceptable except for bulgaria last year. i am not so sure they would be willing to incur significant additional risk on behalf of their syrian allies. like you said, the survival of the regime that is critical for their own viability. that might make a difference. if there is an attack that is aimed at regime change, maybe that will change. all we are saying in the media,

it is going to be a limited theke and therefore, not risk for them to put themselves out of the end of a limb for areme in damascus when they not threatened right now. with imminent overthrow. >> let me see. please. >>--- hi. , there was ang report about leaked information and part of the intelligence that they had, there were cables or something between senior assad officials and that is part of the evidence. more to the point, i was michael you had mentioned maybe we could have a dialogue with iran.

they are threatening to strike iraq if we strike syria. i'm wondering two things. if you could expand on what do couldstrike that we have on our neighbors and also, do you think it is politically or operationally that it may be the west going into unilaterally? >> with regard to iran, i would note it was about three days before the israeli strike in syria in january. supposedly getting ready for hezbollah. the supreme leader foreign- policy advisers, a former , hester. said and the staff

is not necessarily the most authoritative figure, he set an attack -- the israelis launched the attack later. deborah several start since then will stop -- and there have been several strikes since then. i am nota decides, sure with everything going on and the nuclear negotiations that the iranians would want to act at this point. i think the way they respond is perhaps by doubling down on the support for the all set in which they have already done. -- their often approach is to avoid direct complex with -- in direct conflict with the united states or other neighboring countries. 2006, the web responding -- and their way of

responding, we armed hezbollah after the war. double down with outside regime as a statement of defiance. about anti-american backlash, it is very important for the united states to get the broadest coalition. if we cannot get a un security council, we should get the most number of countries available and support from key arab and muslim countries. >> over here. >> my question is for all three of you. thinking about the kind of opportunity that america strikes might provide to the opposition, it's an opportunity and if so, who is in the best position to

and thein the military political opposition recognizing there are certain entities that might benefit others? if you can comment on that. groups that will benefit from within the opposition as a whole, the united states already extends about $1 billion or over to the syrian opposition. what i mean is a combination of humanitarian aid and other kinds of assistance already channeled. the reasons is not only because of our support for the opposition particularly for the coalition, but there are other reasons. a lot of western aid and international is provided to syria. there's a lot of it. it is still the sovereign power in syria and still holds the un seat. deal withll have to

the regime in order to provide assistance. and lots of areas where the opposition is prevalent, it is almost impossible. the u.s. over the past years has changed course and started moving assistance inside of the country. politically, we provide assistance to a number of local councils and other individuals on the ground. , therms of the overall armed groups, the primary recipients of any kind of assistance in our primary area of opportunity would be members of the supreme council. much of not so ideology, but a lot of the hezbollah groups in syria have given the political situation have lurched to the right and are closer to some of the

extreme groups. it is harder to find opportunity in the context than the mainline national groups. those are the primary ones we will be dealing with in the short run because we already deal with them and provide via these channels. the graphic from the support group and the opportunity will be with them and over time will increase and line not only with our assistance, but the development of these individual leaders over time. >> i will add to that another theyrion beside like us or need to be militarily effective. to find highlysy effective units not a vanilla

mist -- not of an islamist stripe. we believe there are some around damascus that are not too islamist or whatever. it is hard to put your hand on it and say this is a unit that is moderate. whateverrn or u.s. or or against us. the u.s.here intelligence community and other intelligence communities really have to do their homework to say this is a group that is ideology -- ideologically ok. agree withyou would me that our speakers are both moderate and effective. we thank them for their efforts and you for coming. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> president considers action against syria for a chemical attack, the british house of commons talked about the uk's role. we'll bring it live tomorrow starting at 9:30 a.m. eastern. >> on the dance washington journal, byron dorgan -- on the next washington journal, byron dorgan discusses syria. the potential effect of the keystone pipeline of the economy and the environment. mccown.t is brigham

he is part of the bush administration. and inspector general for the education department. athington journal is live 7:00 eastern. >> wednesday, they said it was too early for retaliation for using chemical weapons against citizens. the u.s. and u.k. joint forces to take action. forum on u.s.- russia in the upcoming summit. here is 10 minutes of the event. you can see the entire discussion on www.c-span.org.

wondering from each of your perspectives what motivates russian policy on syria and what is their plan if their idea is to present or prevent regime change or something else? we will start with the. >> i will start by saying from the beginning of the russians have calculated there is a good chance and so, given what has happened recently a may have that calculus. the second inc. is a they are very worried about islam it government -- islamist government coming to power and instability and the impact of that on the russian federation itself. the rise of islam is moving governments in that part of the world and has had impact on russian north caucuses and surrounding areas.

that is definitely a domestic part of that concern -- that concerns them. dealing with secular or are about. governments -- or authoritarian governments in that part of the world. at a have a regional impact. that is the premise on which you have to start and not necessarily that they have a particular love for the current regime, but they look and they see the opposition groups in syria and point two the extremist elements. you could ironically say in the longer run, our interests do not diverge that much and nobody wants extremist to come to power. aviously, right now we are at

point -- at what point do you have to decide to do something or it would be largely symbolic. >> we had a meeting in the state department and we said we both have an interest and extremist not come to power and they said that is why we support assad. hand, russians on the one when you do not have international allies aid you overturn somebody like assad. ae westerners have not, with good answer of what happens after assad? through these, they can, with several that or worst both for the region and potential concern this can spread into russia. aspect thato an could be payback from libya. the west took the resolution which are russians chose not to do in the un council.

the russians considered it went beyond the intent of the resolution. a bit of russian paranoia. a very strong attachment to noninterference and it gives back to what i find to be a real concern and the russians see their principal has weakened. is that an excuse? e be inconceivable and the west can never think of it. the russians say this drives policy. it has led them to take an opposite position especially in the un security council to the extent it is being made in washington and other capitals. my guess is everybody believes un would be a foolish exercise. off?y don't you start

>> we still have issues where obviously well-to-do of the russians and even after the cancellation of the summit, we have a state meeting with the counterparts. technically, i guess there is a possibility of the g8 summit next year in st. petersburg that you could have a bilateral presidential meeting. the agenda is narrow. on the arms position would like to pursue, we have not had much of a response from russia. syria, we just talked about. i ran, there's still an issue. -- iran, there is still an issue. i do not see a pressing reason why there will be another presidential summit in obamas term. experience, there is not a lack of an agenda.

that is not a risk to not have a meeting. [laughter] >> i think the white house pulled the plug on the planned summit because when they look at the big issues and when you talk to people in the administration back in june they were saying they wanted to make progress on cuts. speechnt obama made his they wanted to resolve this -- the differences in next band relations -- and expand relations. and they said they were getting nothing from moscow. waysght be useful in some for putin in terms of he plays on the world stage. it would yield nothing of substance important to the white house agenda. go back to some conversations in 2009 when the administration officials talked about the launch they put it in very practical, calculating terms and

they said barack obama in 2009 is prepared to make a better u.s.-russia relationship. and he will make that investment for cooperation for beneficial and to solve questions like iraq and iran. if he makes a investment and after for five months, there is no return and he will cut his losses and look elsewhere. what would happen is the first with 12 and the moscow summit produced some progress. from the percent -- from the perspective of the white house, that was a real return on investment and they continue to make it. right now, they are looking faq what is the payoff and if they see no payoff, it is not like the president does not have -- i suspect that he would be open to the summit, the question is will

there be prospect it will produce something that is useful and important to obama's agenda? >> as president obama considers action against syria for a chemical attack, members of the british house of commons debate the u.k. hostile -- possible row and will bring it live tomorrow starting at 9:30 a.m. eastern. the 50tht thomas anniversary of the march on washington -- up next, the 50th anniversary of the march on washington. washington journal will look at the situation in syria. then, the keystone pipeline. an annual report of economic and workplace priorities.

>> one of the most fun -- fun times i ever had was 2006 and it looks like democrats were going to take over -- take a bag over the house and is was looking bad for republicans. cheney's office called want to know if i could come over so we went over to the vice president residents and have breakfast. i had met him before. first of all, it is unbelievable how much he knew about -- he had been to so many of these district of the years as one of the republican leaders of the house. he was sort of acting gus how bad is this -- asking us how bad is this? we were saying, yeah, it is pretty bad. that and we get to say deal with both caucuses and get a sense of the players. >> with more than 30 years of an

analyst, charlie cook has tracked every race soon made 82. see the rest of this interview on sunday. >> there are several types of bullying that the left engage in and though favor is racial. it is their favorite. it is their philosophy based solely on this point of the idea that they sent up for bid demise groups. everything they do is to stand up for something to fight minority, blacks, jews, gays, women. it does not matter. that oppose the policies, means we hate blacks, jews, gays, and women. >> the editor at large ben shapiro is the guest on sunday. lewisrights leader john will be a guest. frickcredit -- feminist

-- credit. read the book and engage on our facebook page and twitter. >> we pictured june cleaver with a vacuum cleaner or in the kitchen frying bacon for breakfast in her pearls. one ofage does obscure the most important trends especially for women in the 1950's which the participation increased in the labor force. american women workers not only did not go home after world war ii, but they increasingly entered the labor market across the 95th's. -- 1950s. women in theof

workplace followed world war ii part of book tv this labor day weekend. >> a nonprofit organization related to the heritage foundation had a town hall meeting on thursday of the health care law. we'll be in delaware for that event. president obama marked the anniversary of the march on washington with remarks at the lincoln memorial where martin luther king jr. gave his i have a dream speech 50 years ago. former president clinton and john lewis and oprah winfrey also spoke along with family members of martin luther king jr. and other civil rights leaders. the entire event is 4.5 hours long.

everybody, how is everybody doing out there? >> good morning, everybody. it is a privilege to welcome you to a celebration and commemoration of the march on washington. >> on this very day, 50 years ago, in this spot 50 years ago, hundreds of thousands of people came together to be part of a call to action. >> that moment would define not just the american civil rights movement, and it would remind us of our core values, who we are as americans. >> what is the dream? what does it mean to fulfill the dream? >> the speech by dr. martin luther king, jr. was delivered right here. >> if you can see what i see, look around. imagine what it was like to be here 50 years ago. hundreds of thousands of people who came from across our country to be part of something bigger than themselves. >> there was rumors that coming here would be dangerous.

there were fears that nobody would show up. in the end, it was a success because people believed in the power of standing for something. that speech by dr. king was not called, "i have a dream." it was called, normalcy never again. it was about opportunity for all people. >> it was about looking forward to where we need to go as a country, which reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from 50 years ago. he said, the future does not belong to those who are fearful bold projects and new ideas, but it longs to those -- belongs to those who can blend passion and courage. >> in 1963, i was in the mind of god, as my mother would say. my parents, an interracial couple, knew the importance of the message that was delivered

here. their marriage in 1958 was illegal in the state where they lived. they came to the nation's capital to get married. 55 years later, they have seen tremendous change. they have seen opportunities grow. >> look at this audience. if you were here during the march in 63, make some noise. [applause] if you wish you were here in 1963, make some noise.[applause] >> those of you who were here, we say thank you. it was your passion -- >> it was your courage -- >> it was your commitment to change the world allowed those of us who were not there to benefit from the sacrifices you made. >> today we are gathered to humbly say, thank you. to celebrate what was gained, remember what was lost, and move forward. we know we are always better if we stand together.

>> thank you, and welcome, everybody. [applause] >> to give today's invocation, please welcome pastor a.r. bernard from the christian cultural center. >> good morning. writer-philosopher, educator, first black rhodes scholar in 1907, elaine leroy iraq -- leroy locke said that beatings, castration's, and more lynching it almost passes human understanding how people can be

so socially despised, yet artistically esteemed. so degraded, and yet culturally influential. so ostracized, and yet a dominant editorial force in american life. zora neale hurston said, sometimes i do feel discriminated against, but it doesn't make me angry. it merely astonishes me, how can anyone deny themselves the pleasure of my company is beyond me. these were two voices from an era and african-american history that sought to move away from the influences of slavery on black identity, guided by the ideals of self definition, self- expression, self-determination and self-reliance. they forged a new black identity. they called themselves the new

negro movement, better known as the harlem renaissance. creating their own literature, arts, music, theater. they artistically and intellectually challenged the prevailing black stereotypes. from this generation emerged names such as elaine leroy locke, neale hurston claude mckay, fats waller, duke ellington. america experienced and said, we like the style of these people. they enjoyed it, adopted it, integrated it. and exploited it. the popularity of black style and culture soon spread throughout the country. it was not enough for black folks to be artistically admired. black folks wanted and demanded full participation in the social, political, and economic life of american society.

that attitude set the stage for the civil rights movement of the 1950's and 1960's. on wednesday, august 28, 1963, 300,000 people -- 80% of them black -- marched on the nation's capital as did before this lincoln memorial, declaring that the time for radical change had come -- and stood before this lincoln memorial, declaring that the time for radical change had come. celebrating the past is good. but without a vision for the future, we will never move beyond that past. in 2008, america was ready for an intelligent and articulate black man to sit in the oval office. he brought not only his intelligence, but some swagger into the white house.

the reality is, in three years, the first black family will leave the white house, and black folks will be forced to ask the question, where are we as black people in america? where are we politically, socially, educationally, and economically? we will discover that the struggle is not over. with determination, faith, and patience, we have obtained some of the promises of america. but we still have a long way to go. the same god who brought us this far, we must trust and depend on to take us into the future. let us bow our heads and go to that god in prayer. eternal god and everlasting father, our prayer is short and simple.

give us wisdom, give us insight. give us courage. give us leadership. more importantly, give us a vision for the future. without it, we will not move beyond the achievements of the past. we ask you to bless every speaker, every singer. bless us today as we celebrate the past, but look forward to the future. in your name we pray, amen. >> ladies and gentlemen, it is my humbling honor to bring to you now a man who i have the

deepest respect for, someone who is a living legend and true hero of the civil rights movement. please rise to your feet and welcome ambassador andrew young. [applause] >> i don't know about you, but i woke up this morning ♪ with my mind set on freedom ♪ come on, help me. ♪ i woke up this morning with my mind ♪ ♪ staid on freedom ♪ hallelu ♪ hallelu ♪hallelujah ♪ i'm walking and talking with my mind ♪ my mind was set on freedom ♪ walking and talking with my mind

set on freedom ♪ walking and talking with my mind stayed on freedom ♪ ♪ hallelujah hallelujah ♪ [applause] 50 years ago, when we came here, we came from a battle. we came from a battle in birmingham. that was just a few months before, before martin luther king came here to speak of his dream. he had been through bombings, jailing's, beatings. he had been snatched from his jailhouse cell and put in chains and taken down to the reidsville penitentiary in the middle of the night and thought it was going to be his last night on

earth. he went through the battles of albany and birmingham and came out victorious. we knew the fight was just beginning. we knew we had a long way to go, and this was just the start. he came here representing the southern christian leadership conference, saying that we were going to redeem the soul of america from the triple evils of racism, war, and poverty. he came not talking so much about racism nor war. his speech was about poverty. he said the constitution was a promissory note, to which all of us would fall heir. when men and women of color presented their check at the bank of justice, it came back marked insufficient funds. he said he knew that was not the

end. 50 years later, we are still here, trying to cash that bad check. 50 years later, we are still dealing with all kinds of problems. we are not here to claim any victory. we are here to simply say that the struggle continues. a long time ago, when things would get difficult, ralph at say, i don't know what the future may hold. but i know who holds the future. and martin would say that the ark of the universe bends towards justice. god beneath the shadows, keeping watch above his own. i want to say to you this morning -- i want to say --

♪ i got a feeling everything's gonna be all right ♪ ♪ i've got a feeling everything's going to be all right ♪ ♪ i've got a feeling everything's going to be all right ♪ be all right ♪ ♪ be all right be all right ♪ pray on, and stay on, and fight on. [applause] >> please welcome robbie novak, national parks service director jonathan jarvis, and the mayor of washington, d.c., vincent gray.

>> i wasn't here 50 years ago, but i hope to be in the next 50 [applause] we have a duty to make sure the world keeps dreaming for better things. keep dreaming, keep dreaming, [applause]ing. >> in the summer of 1963, the civil rights movement was reaching its crescendo. a march on washington became one of its defining moments. there are countless photographs of that historic day. one shows a pair of national park service rangers standing by dr. king on the steps of the lincoln memorial. the image captures a small moment in a great event, but speaks volumes about the role of the national park service. we are here, we will always be

here as the guardians of the american story. we gather today admits the greatest concentration of american monuments anywhere in the country -- amidst the greatest concentration of american monuments anywhere in the country. jefferson, washington, king, at each you will find a familiar national park service arrowhead, and the distinctive ranger's flat hat. we are there to welcome visitors, answer questions, and take care of these treasured places, to preserve the american stories they represent and the aspirations that bind us together as a people. the places are now reserved as national parks across our nation.

the site of the first women's rights convention in seneca, new york. the edmund pettis bridge and the long road from selma to montgomery. the home and office of cesar chavez. little rock, brown v board. the power of these places is to inspire each generation to have a dream and the courage to make it a reality. national park service's fundamental mission is to keep a promise to the american people, that the ideas that shape us as a nation, the principles we strive to uphold, the values we fought and died for will be preserved forever. we are very proud of the two rangers who stood on the steps 50 years ago. they will forever connect the national park service to the march on washington. my promise to you today is that we will protect these, and all the places entrusted to our care, to the highest standard of

stewardship. we will also use them to inspire the next generation to create a more perfect union. thank you, and welcome. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. on behalf of the 632,000 residents of the district of columbia, allow me to welcome you to our nation's capital. 50 years ago today, in his timeless "i have a dream" speech, dr. king borrowed a lyric from one of our favorite patriotic songs. "let freedom ring." from stone mountain of georgia, and every hill of mississippi.

there was one place that dr. king did not mention, about which he later spoke of. that was the district of columbia. that is because full freedom and democracy were and are still denied to the people who quite literally live within the site of the capitol dome. our city is home to more residents than the state of vermont and wyoming. but we have no voting representative in our own congress. we pay more than $3.5 billion a year in federal taxes. we don't even get the final say over how we spend our own locally raised money.

we send our sons and daughters to fight for democracy overseas, but don't get to practice it fully here at home. today, as we remember those who gave so much have a century ago to extend the blessings of liberty to all americans, i implore and hope that all of you will stand with me when i say that we must let freedom ring from mount saint alban, where rises the majestic national cathedral. we must let freedom ring from the bridges of anacostia. we must let freedom ring from capitol hill itself, until all of the residents of the very seat of our great democracy are truly free. again, let me welcome you to our nation's capital, the district of columbia. please join hands with us and make every american free,

especially those who live in the district of columbia, our nation's capital. >> minister and vocal artist. >> let freedom ring. let it ring. ♪ i believe for every drop of rain

that falls ♪ ♪ a flower grows i believe that somewhere in the darkest night ♪ a candle glows ♪ i believe for everyone who goes astray someone will come to show the way i believe i believe i believe above the storm, the smallest prayer will still be heard

i believe that someone in that great somewhere hears every word every time i hear a newborn baby cry or touch a leaf or see the sky then i know i believe i believe above the storm i believe above the storm the smallest prayer will still be heard i believe that someone in that great somewhere hears every word

every time i hear a newborn baby cry or touch a leaf or see the sky then i know i believe every time i hear a newborn baby cry or touch a leaf or see the sky then i know i i believe then i know i

i believe ♪ [applause] >> please welcome the honorable angus king, u.s. senator from maine. >> 50 years ago, americans marched to this face. they came from the north east, west, midwest. they came from the south. they came by rail, they came by bus. they came by car.

one even roller skated here from chicago. they slept the night before in buses, in cars, on friend's floors, and in churches. 50 years ago this morning, we started in small rivulets of people on the sidestreets of this great city. we joined together in larger streams moving toward the main arteries of washington. then we came together in a mighty river of people down to this place. old, young, black, white, protestant, catholic, and jew. we stopped at the washington monument and heard peter, paul, and mary sing of the hammer of justice and the bill of freedom. -- bell of freedom.

americans came to this place around a radical idea, an idea at the heart of the american experience. an idea new to the world and in 1776, tested in 1865, renewed in 1963, and an idea still new and radical today. all men and women are created equal. all men and women are created equal. 50 years ago, at this place, at this sacred place, americans sent a message to their leaders and around the world that the

promise of equality, of opportunity, equality before the law, equality in the right to freely participate in the benefits and responsibilities of citizenship applied to everyone in this country. not just the lucky few of the right color or the accident of birth. this is what martin luther king meant when he said that his dream was deeply rooted in the american dream. 150 years ago, 150 years ago this summer a mighty battle was fought not far from this place. this idea, the idea of equality, the idea of america hung in the balance. one of the soldiers on those hot july days was a young college professor from maine named

joshua lawrence chamberlain. returning to the battlefield at gettysburg many years later, he expressed the power of the place where such momentous deeds were done. here is what he said. here is what joshua chamberlain said. in great deeds, something abides. on great fields, something stays. forms change and path bodies disappear, but spirits linger to consecrate the ground for the vision place of souls. generations that know us not, and that we know not of, to see where and by whom great things were suffered and done for them

shall come to this deathless field, to this deathless place to ponder and dream. and lo, the shadow of a mighty presence will wrap them in its bosom, and the power of the vision shall pass into their souls. 50 years ago today, this place was a battlefield. no shots were fired. no canon's roared. a battlefield nonetheless. a battlefield of ideas. the ideas that define us as a nation. as it was once said of church held, martin luther king -- churchill, martin luther king mobilized the english language and marched into war. in the process, caught the conscience of the nation.

here today on these steps, 50 years on, indeed something abides. the power of the vision has surely passed into our souls. [applause] >> please welcome the mayor of hattiesburg, johnny depree. >> i want to thank the national conference of black mayors, and the coalitions for the opportunity to make a few remarks on this occasion. decades ago, blood, sweat, tears, organizing meetings, negotiations and adjudications all culminated in a march 50 years ago.

a march that would change the lives of millions of people, including myself. if someone would've told me that this little country boy who grew up on a dirt road in hattiesburg, mississippi would become a mayor, i would have fallen off a truck. my house and my cousin's house were next-door. we call that house a shotgun house. you may have had the opportunity to take a bath in a number 310. i did that. that's where i come from. playing dodge rocks because my mom could not afford the ball. to become the mayor of the fourth-largest city in mississippi. we have been entrusted with making the lives of people better that we serve. our theme is, freedom to

prosper, coexist, govern. african-americans, elected officials and black mayors in particular must not create ways to govern after being elected. for a brief period of time, during reconstruction, african- americans held elected office. jim crow quickly ended that. one of the challenges before african-americans, minorities, and women is the freedom to govern. we must do locally what president obama was able to do nationally, and go back to the individuals, groups, pastors who helped get us here and encourage them to make their voices heard and push our collective agendas forward.

we are afforded an awesome opportunity to be here today. we have this opportunity because of people like martin luther king, who did not quiver or retreat in the face of injustice. it is because of those who demanded to remain seated when they were asked to move. it is because of those who marched on, even though they were weary and bloodied. one foot in front of the other. one song after another. one city, and to late did what people said could not be done. -- until they did what people said could not be done. led by ourrch on. faith. thank you. [applause]

♪ how many roads must a man walk down before they call him a man ♪

♪

,

>> many remain nameless. they're her wrote faces capture oic portrait -- their her faces capture the portrait of the sacrifice. they've risked their lives to bring about change. i want to celebrate those nameless individuals as we reflect on the last 50 years. in doing so, i want you to recognize the hero that exists inside yourself. that every step you take around a corner marks your bravery. hurdles,vercome life's would we face our fears, when we help others become their better selves, we are committing small

acts of heroism. if i were to take a picture of peopleowd right now, would see some of your faces and the movements that are starting your moment to join those silent heroes of the past. individuals who stood in the very spot where you stand today. you now have the responsibility to carry the torch as we gather here at the foot of the lincoln memorial as hundreds of 50 years it -- did ago. i remain encouraged and inspired. let speedy generation to make a difference in the world, to create meaningful change that we can believe in and share in. you doer always told me not have to be leaving the things that i believe, you have to believe in something.

search to find the thing that you be leaving, the thing that you believe will help mankind, and then act upon it. like so many of the heroes of the movement, each of us can spark change by working to strengthen our communities and to straight our -- to shape our common destiny. my dream is that something will resonate inside you and me to remind as each of our common bond. i would like to leave you with these words by dr. king. directly affects one affects all indirectly." i can never be what i ought to be until you are what you ought to be. may god bless you. may we remain collected -- remain connected in love. thank you. [applause]

welcome b.b. winana. -- bb winans. calledhom he justified and to whom he justified he glorified sayhat do we -- to all these things can be against us

with god before us who can be against us with god before us against me? in spite of my failures i still have been called i have been justified when it is all over he promised to glorify so what do we say to all of these things

this is what we say with god before us who can be against us with god before us who can be against us with god before us against me so don't be afraid ♪ that flies by the day god give us angels

we have made always with god before us who can be against us? with god before us who can be against us? ush god before me?can be against with god before us who can be against us? with god before us who can be against us? with god before me

who can be against me? nothing can be against me get out of my way get out of my way they -- meh god before who can be against me? we are going to win with god before us us can be against with god before us who can be against us with god before me ?ho can be against me

with god before me ?ho can be against me god is on my side who can be against me? who can be against me? with god before us who can be against us? meh god before who can be against me?

with god before us who can be against us? with god before us us?can be against with god before me me? ♪n be against >> has many people have pointed ,ut today, the reason it worked

the reason we achieved victory is because we are on the side of righteousness. no matter who tries to stand in your way, i want you to leave here knowing that if god is for you -- i wish i had some help -- i wish i had some help. no matter howus, matter howes, no many trials, no matter how many fights. us, no one can stand against us. >> ♪ if god be for us us can be against if god be for us

who can be against us no matter how long it takes with god before may who can be against me ♪ >> you might have to sing in the rain sometimes. >> ♪ who can be against us with god before us who can be against us? ♪ before med nobody can be against me. with god before me who can be against me with god before me ♪o can be against me?

>> everybody on the lord's side. go with god. with god before us who can be against us? with god before us who could be against us? with god before us ?ho could be against us if god be for us ? ♪ could be against us

who could be against us? if god before me against me? ♪ >> worlds got the whole

in his hands he's got the whole world in his hands brother you on may in his hands he's got you and me brother in his hands he's got the whole world in his hands ♪ sister --me sisterand me in his hands ♪ he's got everybody here in his hands he's got the whole world

in his hands he's got the whole world in his hands ♪ in his hands. ♪ [applause]

>> [indiscernible] click here made --your pain, jesus, is my pain, -- ou are

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ >> your pain, jesus, is my pain, oh, lord. >> i want to say our worshipers here at the national park, to say amen. say amen. amen. you. thank you. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen oprah winfrey. >> hello, everybody! i am absolutely thrilled to be here. i remember when i was nine years old and the march was occurring and i asked my mama could i go to the march. on this date and this place at this time 50 years ago today, dr. king shared his dream for america with america.he was the passionate voice that awakened the conscience of a nation and inspired people all over the

world. the power of his words resonated because they were spoken out of an unwavering belief in freedom, justice, equality and opportunity for all. let freedom ring was dr.king's closing call for a better and more just america. so, today people from all walks of life will gather at 3:00 p.m. for bell ringing events across our great country and around the world as we reaffirm our commitment to dr.king's ideals. dr.king believed that our destinies are all intertwined, and he knew that our hopes and our dreams are really all the same. he challenged us to see how we all are more alike than we are different. so, as the bells of freedom ring

today, we are hoping that it is a time for all of us to reflect on not only the progress that has been made -- and we have made a lot -- but on what we have accomplished and also on the work that still remains before us. it is an opportunity today to recall where we once were in this nation and to think about that young man who at 34 years old stood up here and was able to force an entire country to wake up, to look at itself and to eventually change. and as we the people continue to honor the dream of a man and a movement, a man who in his short life saw suffering and injustice and refused to look the other way. we can be inspired and we, too,

can be courageous by continuing to walk in the footsteps of the path that he forged. he's the one who reminded us that we will never walk alone. he was a drum major for justice. so, as the bells toll today, let us reflect on the bravery, let us reflect on the sacrifice of those who stood up for freedom, who stood up for us, whose shoulders we now stand on. as the bells toll today at three, let us ask ourselves how will the dream live on in me and you and all of us. as the bells toll let us remind ourselves injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. as the bells toll we commit to a life of service, because

dr. king, one of my favorite quotes from him is not everybody can be famous but everybody can be great because greatness is determined by service. so, we ask ourselves what are we doing to lift others up. as the bells toll we must recommit to the love it abides and connects each of us to shine through and let freedom ring. [applause] >> please welcome the king family welcoming the honorable john lewis of georgia.[applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome president jimmy carter, president bill clinton, first lady michelle obama, and the president of the united states, barack obama. -- ers and applause]

-- [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please

stand for our national anthem performed by identity for pop. >> ♪ o say can you see by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hail' d at the twilight's last gleaming whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight o'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming

and the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there o say does that star-spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free, and the home of the brave ♪

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, john lewis. >> president and mrs. obama, president clinton, president carter, i want to think bernice king, the king family and the national park service for inviting me here to speak today. when i look out over this diverse crowd and survey the

guests on this platform, it seems to realize what otis redding was singing about and what martin luther king was preaching this has been a long time coming but a change has come.[applause] we are standing here in the shadow of abraham lincoln 150 years after he issued the emancipation proclamation, and only 50 years after the historic march on washington for jobs and freedom. we have come a great distance in this country in the 50 years, but we still have a great distance to go before we fulfill the dream of martin luther king.

sometimes i hear people saying nothing has changed, but for someone to grow up the way i grew up in the cotton fields of alabama to now be serving in the united states congress makes me want to tell them come and walk in my shoes. come walk in the shoes of those who were attacked by police dogs, by hoses and night sticks, arrested and taken to jail. i first came to washington in the same year that president obama was born to participate in the freedom rides. in 1961 black and white people could not be seated together on a greyhound bus. so we decided to take on integrated fashion rides from here to new orleans. but we never made it there.

over 400 of us were arrested and jailed in mississippi during the freedom rides. a bus was set on fire in anderson, alabama. we were beaten, arrested and jailed. but we helped bring an end to segregation in public transportation. i came back here again in june of 1963 as the new chairman of the student nonviolent coordinating committee. we met with president kennedy, who said he defied the feeling in 1963, we could not register to vote. we had to pay a poll tax, pass a so-called literacy test, count the number of bubbles in a bar of soap or the number of jelly

beans in a jar. hundreds of thousands of people were arrested and jailed throughout the south for trying to participate in the democratic process. medger evers had been killed. that is why we told president kennedy we planned it march on washington. on august 28, 1963, the nation's capitol was in a state of emergency. thousands of troops surrounded the city. workers were told to stay home. stores were closed. but the march was so orderly it was filled with dignity and self-respect because we believed

in the way of peace, the way of love, the way of nonviolence. people came that day to that march dressed like they were on their way to a religious service. mahalia jackson sang how we got over. there were thousands of us together in a strange sense it seemed like the whole place started rocking. we truly believe in every human being, even those who were violent toward us there was a spark of the divine. and no person had the right to scar or destroy that spark. martin luther king jr. taught us the way of peace, the way of love, the way of nonviolence. he taught us to have the power to forgive, the capacity to be

reconciled. he taught us to stand up, to speak up, to speak out, to find a way to get in the way. people were willing to put their bodies on the line for a greater cause, greater than themselves. not one incident of violence was reported that day. because of the leadership of the movement. the spirit of dr. king's words captured the hearts of people not just around america but around the world. on that day, martin luther king jr. made a speech, but he also delivered a sermon.

he transformed these marble steps of the lincoln memorial into a modern-day pulpit. he changed us forever. after the ceremony was over, president kennedy invited us back down to the white house. he met us standing in the door of the oval office and he was beaming like a proud father as he shook the hands of each one of us he said, you did a good job. you did a good job. and he said to dr. king, and you have a dream. 50 years later we can ride anywhere we want to ride, stay where we want to stay. those signs that say white and colored are gone. and you won't see them any more.

except in a museum, in a book, or on a video. but there are still invisible signs, barriers in the heart of human kind that draw a gap between us. too many of us still believe our differences define us instead of the divine spark that runs through all of human creation. the scars and stains of race ism still remain in society where they stop and frisk in new york or have injustice in the case of -- trayvonis martin. martin in florida. the incarceration of millions of americans, immigrants hiding in the shadow, unemployment, homelessness, poverty, hunger or

the renewed struggle for voting rights. we must never ever give up, we must never ever give in, we must keep the faith and keep our eyes on the prize. [applause] >> we did go to jail. but we got the civil rights act. we got a voting rights act. we got a fair housing act. but we must continue to push. we must continue to work. as the late organizer for the deanh said in 1963, and the of the civil rights movement once said -- we may have come here on different ships but we are all in the same boat now., it doesn't matter whe

are black or white, latino, asian american or native american, whether we are gay or straight, one one people, one family, we all live in the same house, not just the american house but the world's house. [applause] and when we finally assess these truths, then we will be able to fulfill dr. king's dreams to build a beloved community, a nation and a world at peace with itself. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> please welcome the 39th president of the united states, jimmy carter.

>> i'm greatly honored to be here. i realize that most people know that it is highly unlikely that any of us three over to my right would have served in the white house or be on this platform had it not been for martin luther king jr. and his movement and crusader for civil rights. so, we are grateful to him for our being here. i'm also proud that i came from the same part of the south as he did. he never lost contact with the folks back home. he was in tennessee helping garbage workers when he gave his life to a racist bullet. i remember how it was back in those days. i left georgia in 1943 for college and the navy. when i came home, from the submarine duty i was put on the board of education. i suggested to the other members

that we visit all the schools in the county. they had never done there before. they were reluctant to go with me. but we finally did it. and we found that white children had three nice brick buildings but the african-american children had 26 different elementary schools in the county. they were in churches, front living rooms, and a few were in barns. they had so many because there were no school buses for african-american children, they had to be within walking distance of where they went to class. their school books were outdated and worn out. and every one of them had a white child's name in the front of a book. we finally obtained some buses and in the state legislature ordained that the front fenders

be painted black. not even the school buses could be equal to each other. one of the finest moments of my life was 10 months after dr. king's famous speech right here when president lyndon johnson signed the civil rights act. i was grateful when the king family adopted me as their presidential candidate in 1976. every handshake from dr. king, from daddy king, every hug for coretta, got me a million yankee votes.[laughter] daddy king prayed at the democratic convention, for quite a while, and coretta was in the hotel room with me and rosalyn when i was elected president. my presidential battle of freedom citation to coretta said he gazed at the great wall of

segregation and saw that the power of love could bring it down. he made our nation stronger because he made it better. we were able to create a national historic site where dr. king lived, worked and worshiped. it is next door to the carter center linked by a walking we try to make principles follow the same as theirs emphasizing peace and human rights. i remember the daddy king said too many people said that martin freed only black people. in truth, he helped free all people. he added it is not enough to have a right to sit a lunch counter if you can't afford to buy a meal. he also said the ghetto still

looks the same even from the front seat of a bus. perhaps the most challenging statement of martin luther king jr. was, and i quote, the question of our time is how to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence. in the nobel prize ceremony of 2002 i said to my fellow georgians the greatest leader that my native state and perhaps my native country has ever produced and i was not excluding presidents and even the founding fathers when i said this. i believe we all know how dr. king would have reacted to the new idea of requirements to

exclude certain voters especially african-americans.i think we all know how dr. king would have reacted to the supreme court's striking down a crucial part of the voter rights act recently passed overwhelmingly by congress.i think we know how dr. king would have reacted to unemployment among african-americans being almost twice the rate of white people and for teenagers at 42%. i think we would all know how dr. king would have reacted to our country being awash in guns and for more and more states passing "stand your ground" laws. i think we know how dr. king would have reacted for people from the district of columbia still not having full citizenship rights. [cheers and applause] >> and i think we all know how dr. king would have reacted to have more than 835,000 african-american men in prison, five times as many as when i

left office and with one-third of all african-american males being destined to being imprisoned in their lifetime. there's a tremendous agenda ahead of us and i'm thankful to martin luther king jr. and his dream is still alive. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> and now, please welcome the 42nd president of the united states, bill clinton. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. mr. president, mrs.obama, president carter, vice president biden. i want to thank my great friend reverend bernice king and the king family for inviting me to be part of this 50th observation

of one of the most important dr.s in american history. king and a philip randolph, john lewis, dorothy heights. daisy bates and all the others who led there massive march knew what they were doing on this hallowed ground. in the shadow of lincoln's statue the burning memory of the fact that he gave his life to preserve the union and end slavery, martin luther king urged his crowd not to drink from the cup of bitterness, but to reach across the racial divide. because, he said, we cannot walk alone. their destiny is tied up with our destiny. their freedom is bound to our freedom.

he asked the victims of racial violence to meet white americans with outstretched hands, not a clenched fist and prove the redeeming power of unearned suffering. and then he dreamed of an america where all citizens would sit together at a table of brotherhood and little white boys and girl and little black boys and girls would hold hands across the color line. where his own children would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. this march and that speech changed america. they opened minds, they melted hearts, and they moved millions including a 17-year-old boy

watching alone in his home in arkansas. it was an empowering moment but also an empowered moment. as the great chronicler of those years taylor branch wrote, the movement here gained a force to open "the stubborn gates of freedom and out flowed the civil rights act, voting rights act, medicaid, medicare, open housing. it is well to remember the leaders and foot soldiers were both idealists and tough realists. they had to be. it was a violent time. just three months later we lost president kennedy and we thank god that president johnson came in and fought for all of those issues i just mentioned. [applause]

>> just five years later, we lost senator kennedy. and in between there was the carnage of the fight for jobs, freedom and equality. just 18 days after this march four little children were killed in the birmingham church bombing. then there were the ku klux klan murders, the mississippi lynchings. and a dozen others, until in 1968 dr. king himself was martyr -- was martyred, still marching for jobs and freedom. what a debt we owe to those people who came here 50 years ago. [applause] >> the martyrs played it all for a dream. a dream as john lewis said that millions have now actually lived.

how are we going to repay the debt? dr. king's dream of interdependence, his prescription of whole-hearted cooperation across racial lines, they ring as true today as they did 50 years ago. oh, yes, we face terrible political gridlock now. read a little history. it is nothing new. yes, there remain racial inequality in employment, income, health, wealth, incarceration and in the victims and perpetrators of violent crime. but we don't face beatings, lynchings and shootings for our political beliefs any more and i would respectfully suggest that martin luther king did not live and die to hear his heirs whine about political gridlock. it is time to stop complaining and put our shoulders against

the stubborn gates holding the american people back.[applause] we cannot be disheartened by the forces of resistance to building a modern economy of good jobs and rising income or rebuilding our education system to give our children a common core of knowledge necessary to ensure success. or to give americans of all ages access to affordable college and training programs. and we thank the president for his efforts in those regards. [applause] we cannot relax in our efforts to implement health care reform in a way that ends discrimination against those with preexisting conditions, one of which is inadequate income to pay for rising health care. a health care reform that will lower costs and lengthen lives.

nor can we stop investing in science and technology to train young people of all races for the jobs of tomorrow and to act on what we learned about our bodies, our businesses, and our climates. we must push open those stubborn gates. we cannot be discouraged by a supreme court decision that said we don't need this critical provision of the voting rights act because look at the states. it made it harder for african americans and hispanics and students and elderly and infirm and poor working folks to vote. what do you know? they showed up, stood in line for hours and voted anyway. so obviously we don't need any kind of law. [applause] >> but a great democracy does not make it harder to vote than to buy an assault weapon. [applause]

>> we must open those stubborn gates. and let us not forget while racial divides persist and must not be denied, the whole american landscape is littered with the lost dreams and dashed hopes of people of all races. and the great irony of the current moment is that the future has never brimmed with more possibilities. it has never burned brighter in what we could become if we push open those stubborn gates. and if we do it together. the choice remains as it was on that distant summer day 50 years ago. cooperate and thrive or fight with each other and fall behind. we should all thank god for

dr. king and john lewis and all of those who gave us a dream to guide us. a dream they paid for like our founders with their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor. we thank them for reminding us that america is always becoming, always on a journey, and we all, every single citizen among us, have to run our laps. god bless them and god bless america. [cheers and applause] >> please give a warm welcome to martin luther king iii. [laughter] -- [applause] >> mr. president, madam first lady, president carter, president clinton, congressman lewis, and to all program

participants, this is an unusual moment in our world history as we observe the 50th anniversary. and i'm so thankful for the opportunities to really thank america for helping to realize the dream. although i must say it is not yet realized. so we must redouble and quadruple our efforts. so much has been said today -- and i was 5 years old in 1963 when dad delivered his message -- so, i'm blessed that we were able to bring our daughter, who is hopefully paying attention, 5 years old, so that she can appreciate this history and continue to participate.

there are two quick other things that i want to say. i have been speaking all week as many of us have. but i'm reminded that dad challenged us. that's what he did, challenged our nation to be a better nation for all god's children. i'm reminded that he taught us the power of love, agape love, the love that is totally unselfish, you love somebody if you are old, young, white, black, native american, latino, it doesn't matter because god calls us to do that. love and forgiveness is what we need more of not just in our nation but throughout the world. so i want to rush to tell you dad said the ultimate measure of a human being is where one stands not in times of comfort and convenience but in times of

challenge and controversy. he said on some questions cowardice acts is the position, speed is vanity is a position popular but that something deep inside calls conscience acts is a position of rights so often talked about sometimes we must take positions that are neither safe nor popular nor politic but we must take those positions because our conscience tells us they are right. our families say this afternoon we've got a lot of work to do, but none of us should be any ways tired. why? because we've come much too far from where we started. you see, no one ever told any of us that our roads would be easy, but i know our god, our god, our

god did not bring any of us this far to leave us. thank you and god bless you. [cheers and applause] [applause]welcome. >> thank you. president obama and mrs. obama, presidents clinton and carter, other distinguished program participants, i'm honored to be among you today and to address this historic gathering. i don't know if i am the most senior speaker to address this assembly today, but i'm

certainly and surely the only person alive who knew martin luther king jr. when he was a baby. it has been my great privilege to watch my little brother grow and thrive and develop into a fine man and then a great leader whose legacy continues to inspire countless millions around the world. unfortunately, a bout with a new virus 50 years ago prevented me from attending the original march. but i was able to watch it on television, and i was as awe-struck as everyone else. i knew martin was an excellent preacher because i had seen him deliver on many occasions.

but on that day, martin achieved greatness because he melded the hopes and dreams of millions into a grand vision of healing, reconciliation and brotherhood. the dream my brother shared with our nation and world on that sweltering day, a day 50 years ago, continues to further clear and sustain nonviolent activists