>> steve: tomorrow, senator marco rubio is going to join us and race car driver curt bush in a hot air balloon. >> brian: everyone coming back tomorrow? >> elisabeth: yep. >> steve: see you then. not. good morning, everybody. fox news alert. it is not over yet. day four of the terrorist standoff in kenya. you can still hear the gunfire. you can still hear the security forces moving toward the upscale shopping mall. watch closely. [gunfire] those are kenyan government forces said to be making their final push to rescue any surviving hostages held inside by group of islamic terrorists. good morning every body. day four of terror. i'm bill hemmer. welcome to "america's newsroom." martha: i'm martha maccallum. kenyan government officials insist they reclaimed control of the mall.

they're getting reports that the local morgues are being warned they should expect many more bodies. bill: we spoke to grn reporter, james reinl with a gripping account what he learned inside. he is back live from nairobi. james, what is the situation as it stands now? >> reporter: well, here we are into the fourth day of the siege. attackers took control of the westgate shopping center. we still heard explosions and gunfire today. we're getting contradict he at this accounts why this is and what is happening inside the four-story building. if you listen to the guest they say everything is over. we had a senior police official say the operation is completed. we heard all the hostages are freed. they control all the building even as they use this expression, mopping out the building. if you listen to al-shabaab, that is the somali-based islamist group meant to be

responsible for organizing this outrage, they have a twitter feed, social networking site, it is hard to verify, but they say militants are holding their ground inside the build. it's a case who do you listen to? bill: it is tough james, as you try to piece this together for us. try to piece this together as well. are there americans among the attackers, terrorists inside? >> reporter: yes there is information going around about that and it comes from an interview that the kenyan foreign minister gave. she said two or three americans are among the terrorists. she told as you little bit of information about then. she said they're between 18 and 19 years of age. perhaps they are somali or arab in origin, one of maybe come from minnesota or other places is what she said. bill: james, we were given a report moments ago that the morgue in nairobi was warned they should expect many more bodies. what do you have on that at this

moment? >> reporter: earlier today coming out of the building we saw paramedics takeing a body out of the building. if you think about the numbers here, about 65 people have been confirmed dead. that means 65 plus dead bodies have been removed already. don't forget the, that the attackers went around the morgue, went around the shopping center at the beginning shooting people and spraying bullets around and throwing grenades. obviously there will be more dead bodies inside. there is something between 60 and 70 people have been unaccounted for. these are missing people, relatives and loved ones concerned inside. you do the math. obviously there are more bodies inside the building that have not been removed as security forces believe they gained control of site, they will move in and take the bodies of out. that is why the morgue is petting ready to receive extra corpses. >> sell phone video is gripping,

and james you report on the ground in nairobi, we're told many terrorists are hiding inside the shopping center which is two stories. james, thank you for your time. grn. we'll be in touch in an hour's time. here is martha with more. martha: here is another surprising angle coming out of reports from kenya this morning saying great britain's notorious white widow may be among the terrorists involved in this attack and may have been killed by kenyan security forces. this woman pictured here is british fugitive, samantha luthwaite. her husband blew himself up in london's 2005 terrorist attack they call seven seven. here is the picture of her husband caught on surveillance cameras that day. 52 people were killed. tourists blew themselves up on london buses. a horrific day for people in

london. the white widow, she has been on the run ever since is suspected of planning numerous terror plots and may have been training female jihadis. we'll have more on her coming up live next hour. >> couple things, martha, want to show eastern africa. somalia shares a long border with kenya. if we go into the map, nairobi, capital city, the three or four-story mall shaped in terms of a rectangle on this map. we can show you the floor design. we're trying to piece together based on various reporting what happened saturday afternoon and what is happening inside now. this is all based on some of the reporting we're getting out of nairobi. a main entrance here, we're told many hijackers covering their faces with handkerchiefs or scarves. entered saturday afternoon. this is the outdoor seating area one of the first places in the mall hit by the attackers. this large blue area here?

that is that supermarket that stretches over two floors. it was reported, advance it one time for us, mark, we'll take you to the next floor. that supermarket was up here as well. we're told many of the attackers were taking refuge inside the supermarket. that is why it was so difficult to apprehend and find them and possibly on behalf of the security forces in kenya to kill them and take them out. there are escalators here and elevators. it gives us the impression that the center of the mall is much like you find in the u.s. with an atrium in the middle. the gunmen were shooting up in the area of that atrium. kenyan security forces shooting down initially on saturday afternoon. the top floor, we have this is entrance to a garage, called a car park in nairobi. there are some reports suggesting that the gunmen came to the main entrance on the ground floor and came from this car park as well. if that is the case, that is a two-pronged attack would have taken the shopping mall from bottom floor and the top floor.

latest report about the morgue, once they get inside the security area, it has been off and on whether or not it is skew or not, there could be many more bodies inside the shopping maul. we do not know the outcome of how many people lost their lives. martha: stories of lined up people and execution-style killings inside this mall. it could very well be that we'll see many more bodies in this story. it is continuing to get worse by the day. kenyan officials are now confirming that some of the terrorists were americans. as we mentioned to you moments ago, recruited by al-shabaab and brought overseas to fight. >> i think now everybody needs to up their game. i think this new attack shows that we do not do enough. we need to watch much more closely with everybody. but much more with the u.s. i think and the u.k. governments because as you know, what the victims and the perpetrators

came from kenya, the united kingdom and the united states. martha: so it is clear that there has been recruiting going on in this country to send people back to do this kind of work. will this inspire even more of that? americans killing americans in a mall in kenya. it is an unbelievable development this morning. we also want to get you to this back here at home. so she may be gone from the irs but she is clearly not forgotten. lois lerner, the irs official at at the heart of the official targeting tea party groups is now retiring as we learned. who can forget this moment, lois lerner, made by the taxpayer her salary, took the fifth from furious lawmakers who were there to demand answers today. >> i have not broken any laws. i have not violated any irs rules and regulations and i have not provided falls information to this or any other congressional committee.

i've decided to follow my counsel's advice and not testify or answer any of the questions today. she waived her right to fifth amendment privilege by issuing opening statement. she ought to stand her and answer our questions. martha: trey gowdy was very fired up in that moment. is that it? stuart varney joins me now, host of "varney & company." are we ever going to hear lois lerner's side of this story, stuart? >> oh, yes. she may well be returned to congress to testify again under some arrangement or other but she has now retired. she was told by the irs that she was going to be quote, removed. that was for neglect of duties. she promptly retired. here's what she gets in retirement. about $60,000 a year as a pension. she is 62 years owed. she gets that for life. she keeps that pension and receives it, either if she goes to work elsewhere and earns money elsewhere. she get as very strong health benefit for the rest of her life. the government will pay 72% of

her health costs that would include a non-working spouse. and she can not be punished financially for not answering those questions. the government is the only employer which may not punish an employee for failure to answer work-related questions. so she may be back but she is going to take the money and walk away with it for now. martha: i mean it's shocking really on so many levels. and the fact that a government employ he is the only kind of employee in this country that can not be forced to answer questions by their employment when government employees are paid for by taxpayer dollars is really something to think about. >> it is because she was at the very center of scandal which suggested that government machinery had been used against the president's political opponents in the middle of an election. it is a very big story. totally neglected elsewhere in the media by the way but she get money for now. martha: get as full pension despite she was found guilty of

neglect of duties. >> that's correct and removed. >> something to think about on your way to work. stuart, thank you. >> sure thing. bill: 11 minutes past the hour. plenty to come in the next two hours. six days to the start of obamacare, folks. new reports that even senate staffers are being told to hold off getting involved. why aren't you getting the same message? that is a good question. we'll debate that coming up. martha: plus the countdown to a shutdown. you have that to look forward to as well. now it is republicans versus republicans. why senate leaders are lining up against the tea party. bill: the slaughter of those innocents to the kenyan mall, causing strong condemnation all over the world except it would seem among muslim leaders. bill o'reilly has a big problem with that. >> the muslim. >> gnawed believes that infidels do not deserve to live. you will not hair leaders of world say that including president obama. they will not tell you what is really going on here.

[ steam hisses ] actually... guys! [ female announcer ] ...it can. introducing swiffer steamboost powered by bissell. it gets the dirt that mops can leave behind with steam-activated cleaning pads that break down dirt and lock it away. how did you get this floor so clean? ♪ steamboost, sir! [ female announcer ] new swiffer steamboost powered by bissell. not just clean, steamboost clean.

help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, whe experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger. with my united mileageplus explorer card. i've saved $75 in checked bag fees. [ delavane ] priority boarding is really important to us. you can just get on the plane and relax. [ julian ] havg a card that doesn't charge you foreign transaction fees saves me a ton of money. [ delavane ] we can go to any country and spend money the way we would in the u.s. when i spend money on this card, can see brazil in my future. [ anthony ] i use the explorer card to earn miles in order to go vis my family, which means lot to me. ♪

martha: fox news alert. we have some new pictures coming to us from southern california. look at this blaze. this one has been dubbed, the madre fire. it is outside of los angeles. authorities say the brush fire has burned about 190-acres so far. a little over two dozen homeowners so far have been told to get ready to leave if the wind shifts. only 5% contained. the crews say they are making progress. bill: 9:is a in new york now. senor kenyan officials say some of the militants who attacked the mall are americans. such a development, if true, raises a question, if they can shoot up a packed mall in kenyan shooting men, women and children, what would stop them from doing the same in the u.s.? phillip mudd, former director of cia counterintelligence center and wrote a book, takedown for the hunt of al qaeda.

welcome back to you. memphis, tennessee. >> good morning. bill: two americans, possibly age 18, age 19 among the attackers possibly. not confirmed. if true, what does that tell you? >> this tells me what that what we saw going back to my experience at the fbi in 2006 is coming true today. that is, we saw americans in expatriate communities, somalia expatriate communities, indianapolis and san diego become energized fighting in somalia. some kids like these, who are 18 and 19 years old talked to families back home and decided to fight. we're seeing a change in these mall attacks. bill: is this then, when you have a successful terrorist attack, as grisly as this is, does it help in recruiting, as sick and as sad as that sounds? >> i think in some way it is does. i would by the way still rank syria as more significant recruiting ground today than somalia for places like western europe and north america. with the decline of al qaeda in

areas like saudi arabia, yemen, pakistan, the people who want to fight have to find a new place that will be someplace like syria, somalia or kenya. they, other places to go like pakistan are being shut down. bill: if you're 18 or 19 you're vulnerable. >> that's right. bill: you're buying the message. leaving minneapolis or wherever you live in the u.s. and go back to southern somalia and join the fight there that's sick. >> that's right. i could characterize it not just terrorism, sort of a cult culture of the you think after gang. a older brother or father figure might recruit a gang member because the gang member is impressionable. we saw same thing consistently in cities across the america when i was in fbi. brother or father say things are bad back at home you have to protect your family. very quickly, in days or weeks, somebody who is 17 years old will become radicalized. bill: we wonder where the outrage is in the muslim world.

bill o'reilly talked about that. >> this is simply about murder. if your christian or a jew you are a target. it is clear al qaeda and its affiliates will wage small-time terrorism all over the world. they will burn down christian churches, attack jewish synagogues, if they can launch another 9/11. what is muslim world doing bit? nothing! we're living in a cowardly world and terrorists know it. bill: that is seven minute clip cut down to 35 seconds. the point is clear, where are the moderate muslim leaders coming out saying this is wrong? we condemn it. we won't stand for it. we will not allow our religion to be defamed on behalf of these idiots? >> you've seen some of this across the islamic world. bill: where? >> for example in saudi arabia the senior cleric has been out talking about what is going on in somalia. one significant point, if you look, regardless what leaders say, look at polling data across the middle east in places that

witnessed terror attack, saudi arabia, pakistan, the support for radical islamists, this kind of violence is declining. we have -- bill: thank heaven. >> yes but what i'm saying we should not interpret this episode as evidence that the echos of al qaeda are increasing. they are not. bill: phil, a very direct question here. how many of these, the u.n. will kick off in a matter of moments now. how many world leaders are going to stand on that stage and condemn what we're watching in nairobi today? >> my guess is most of them, i don't know, 75, 80, 90% most of them will condemn this. bill: you believe that? >> yes i do. talk tomorrow. see what happens. bill: we're watching and waiting for that. we're looking for headlines. we're looking for interviews. we can't find them. >> well, as i said, you look what the senior cleric in saudi arabia said the past few days. he commented on this public opinion across the middle east doesn't support this. these guys are not going to win

by murdering innocents. they can win by taking down aircraft but not by murdering innocents. bill: we'll watches unga. we'll see if that is the case. thank you, sir, out of memphis. phillip mudd with us. 20 past. martha. martha: these young people were weeks away from welcoming their first baby. a pregnant harvard graduate and her architect boyfriend were killed in the mall, in the kenya terror attacks. coming up we've got new details about the lives that were lost inside that mall. tragic story. bill: he vowed to do whatever it takes to defund obamacare but ted cruz being sidelined by some in his own party? fair and balanced debate coming up next. first cruz. >> washington is good to giving special deals to giant corporations like president obama did, to members congress like president obama did, we ought to treat american families at least as well as the president treats giant

corporations and members of congress. too big.

too small. too soft. too tasty. [ both laugh ] [ male announcer ] introducing progresso's new creamy alfredo soup. inspired by perfection.

bill: a former fbi agent pleading guilty to child pornography charges earlier in the year. now pleading guilty leaking classified information to the associated press. former fbi tech, donald john saclaven sign ad plea agreement in both cases according to prosecutors. he knew exactly what he was doing by giving up information about a foiled terror plot in the arabian peninsula and put countless lives at risk because of it. martha: fox news alert. a live look now at the united nations general assembly where president obama is set to speak about 40 minutes from now. amid speculation that the president could speak with the leader of iran during all of

this that goes on over the next few days in new york. that would be huge. this is something that has not happened since before the air iranian revolution since 199. eric shawn is outside the united nations t should be a very interesting day ahead for u.s.-iran diplomacy either way, right, eric? >> reporter: absolutely, martha. three decades of diplomatic isolation could end with a handshake. white house says there is no formal meeting planned for president and iranian counterpart, hassan rouhani. both men could be in the same room at that time. all eyes are on the their speeches today as they address the general assembly and the iranian nuclear program. president obama expected to lay out his vision of global problems including the situation in syria with chemical weapons but he is also expected to say, that he is willing to signal diplomatic efforts to engage the iranians on that nuclear program of as for rouhani, we should look for the opportunity for him

to offer conciliatory steps about that program, that his nation, they claim does not want to seek nuclear weapons. on thursday there will be a major step. that is when secretary of state john kerry will meet with his iranian counterpart, iranian former minister along with some other foreign ministers. zarif was had been for 10 years the united nations ambassador from iran. he knows us very well. and eloquent and advocate for his country and speaks with conviction. he knows us because he went to san francisco state and university of send very, martha. martha: what about the protests going on outside, eric? >> reporter: there will be major protests planned this morning. critics of the iranian regime. they say rouhani has blood on his hand and shouldn't even be here. the state department continues to list iran as states that sponsor terrorism. that only increased through hamas and hezbollah the recent assassination plot against the

saudi ambassador in washington. protesters and demonstrators are outraged that rouhani is even here. >> minister rouhani belongs in prison. he has so much blood on his hands. he is guilty of so many crimes in iran, of executing so many people. of torturing so many people. in fact even said himself he duped the west with nuclear talks. >> reporter: and despite all this talk iran is still violating six security council resolution including brazenly ignoring the demand to stop uranium enrichment, mart. that. martha: will be a very interesting day. bill: you don't know what the speeches will entail, what the headlines will come from. remember chavez a few years ago? banging his fist up in the air. martha: i can still smell the sulfur, chavez, right? bill: new york city. martha: unbelievable. we see posters and placards all the time say the iranian president should never be in the city of new york as that man

said on the streets. a lot of controversy. bill: we're awaiting on speeches. you will see a little bit of them throughout the day on fox. meantime we're only days from a potential government shut down. how will senate republicans handle the issue of funding obamacare? we're about to find out. >> if harry reid and the president are saying unless they can force funding for obamacare, unless they can force obamacare on every american family they will shut down the government. the way we stop it is standing up to them, saying look, fund every bit of government. so i can reach ally bank 24/7, but there are no branches? 24/7. i'm sorry, i'm just really reluctant to try new things. really? what's wrong with trying new things? look! mommy's new vacuum! (cat screech) you feel that in your muscles? i do... drink water. it's a long story. well, not having branches let's us give you great rates and service.

i'd like that. a new way to bank. a better way to save. ally bank. your money needs an ally.

you really love, what would you do?" ♪ [ woman ] i'd be a writer. [ man ] i'd be a baker. [ woman ] i wanna be a pie maker. [ man ] i wanna be a pilot. [ woman ] i'd be an architect. what if i told you someone could pay you and what if that person were you? ♪ when you think about it, isn't that what retirement should be, paying ourselves to do what we love? ♪

martha: so now, here we are, just days from a potential government shoulddown and senate minority leader mitch mcconnell says he will not back an attempt to filibuster a bill that would defund obamacare but funds the government. a number of tea party republicans including senator ted cruz, want to block that. they want to stop senate majority leader harry reid from stripping that obamacare provision out. october 1, there go the days flying by as the deadline to get something passed or the government will begin the shutdown process. >> no american wants a government shutdown. i don't want a government shut down. no one on this side of the aisle wants a government shut down. the house of representatives doesn't want a government shutdown. >> we don't always agree all the time on every single vote and sometimes we disagree but i

think as republicans we do stand behind the idea that we need to stop obamacare. we need to fight it. we need to stop it anyway we can. martha: senator mike lee last night, "on the record." we're joined by bob beckel, former democratic campaign manager and co-host of "the five" on fox news channel and brad blakeman, former assistant to president george w. bush. welcome to both of you. brad, let's take a look at the republican side of this first. the story this morning that senator ted cruz is very upset to learn that john cornyn and mitch mcconnell are whipping these votes against what he is stands for in the senate and that they want to push this vote through knowing that harry reid will strip out the defund provision. >> martha, we've been down this road many, many times before. when we get to the midnight hour? what happens? there isn't a government shutdown. there shouldn't be a government shutdown on obamacare. we're winning war on obamacare. the problem this isn't the battle by which to win the war.

what we need to do and i agree with the senator who is believe that this is not the right vehicle to do it, that we live to fight another day. and that day is in 2014. republicans have to have a plan. we have to have candidates and we have to win. we only control one branch of government. half of a branch. the house, the senate's controlled by the democrats and president obviously controls the white house. we don't have the votes. we don't have the procedure. don't go into a battle that you're not going to win. martha: all right. so what brad is obviously saying here that 2014 is the next battle. and there's a republican belief once obamacare is more in place, it will wreak enough havoc it will be ben firm to republicans in 2014 and they need to wait for that moment? >> well that is what they're hoping. look right now, what this is turning into a battle between republicans. democrats are skiting on sidelines. democrats watched when the republicans shut down government in the past and it has never been very good for the republicans. so i think right now, i think

brad's right. this is not the time to be doing it. it is not the place. whether you like it or not it is the law of the land. once you pass something like you ought to fund it. like passing the peace corps and saying we'll not give you any money for it. it doesn't make any sense to me that they would try to do that. if you want to try to defeat obamacare, elect enough people and get it defeated by legislative process from which it was born. martha: yeah. you know, we get so many tweets and emails from viewers saying, brad, quite frankly, they support what senator cruz is doing. and that that's why they sent a number of these individuals to congress. they want them to fight with every last ounce of their being to do whatever they can to bring down obamacare. because they're very much against it. how can you criticize him and others doing what they believe they were sent to washington to do? >> look, standing on principle is great and we should but we're winning the battle with american people with obamacare. but this isn't the vehicle to do it. martha, assuming the house bill

is passed by senate, then it goes over to the white us. do you think the president is going to pass the bill that strips his only, quote, unquote, achievement? no. assuming he vetoes the bill sends it back to both house, you need two thirds to override the president's veto. that ain't going to happen. you have to deal with reality. we don't have the proper and procedure and don't have the votes to seek to do what we need to do to fight. z is doing thiscle this morning for electoral politics. he believes this is widening his base. ginning up access to potential voters in the future. brad, do you think that is what he is doing? then i get bob on political level. >> i don't happen to believe that. ted cruz is standing for principle and belief. that's great. there comes a time when you have to deal with reality. the reality you stood on principle. that's fine. it is time to move on. the big battle is 2014. if we get a good platform

together. it is not enough to be against something. we have to stand for something. with great candidates, we get the senate back. increase the majority in the house and really in a good position to dot things we want to do. martha: i heard brit last night, brit hume on "special report", bob, basically saying ted cruz, it is sort after 50/50. if he wins this, in the minds of the people who support him, it could make him the next star of the gop. >> well, there are two principles ted cruz is standing on here. i never seen a republican senator get more copy than this guy does. he is standing on principle about obamacare. i believe that is what he thinks. the other principle is ted cruz. he is getting himself set up because he wants to get in the mix of potential presidential candidates. that is what this is about. i don't know who this guy is thinks he is kidding, he gets out and talks about everything. remind me of chuck schumer on the republican side. martha: brad, how do you think this ends up quickly? >> look it ends up like it ended up every time. we go to the midnight hour.

there is no crisis the government is funded and we move on to the next bat he and that is increasing the debt sealing. >> always on to the next one. brad, thank you very much. bob, see you at 5:00. thanks, guys. bill: six days to obamacare's big launch. senate staffers are told to hold off signing up with the new exchange. what do they know that we don't? martha: incredible, right? bill: we talk a panel who are doctors first who may have the answers. >> we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it away from the fog of the controversy. for a strong bag that grips the can... get glad forceflex. small change, big difference. coffee should come in one size: mug. stay grounded with the rich, bold taste

of maxwell house coffee. always good to the last drop.

they always have. they always will. that's why you take charge of your future. your retirement. ♪ ameriprise advisors can help you like they've helped millions of others. listening, planning, working one on one. to help you retire your way... with confidence. that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you. ameriprise financial. more within reach. bill: you likely did not get this message from the government. six days out from the start of obamacare but senate aides did. they're being told they should delay enrollment in health insurance plans for now. that's where we are on the left, september 24th. that is where we will be next tuesday on the right when

millions of americans are being urged to buy health insurance from the new obamacare exchanges starting next tuesday. terrific panel to talk about this. republican brad winthrop is a physician who served in iraq first. now he is serving in the u.s. house. renee ellmers represents north carolina. she is also a nurse. dr. marc siegel, part of our fox news medical a-team. good morning to all three of you. i read about this stuff every day. it is our job to do. i'm still massively confused. i can't imagine what americans and businesses are going through. to the members of the congress who are members of the doctors caucus as well. you both voted to vote to defund obamacare. congressman wynn top to you first. what are you so afraid of? what is coming our way soon? >> one of the one thing i'm concerned about as a citizen we're not treated equally under the law with carveout and i have concern about the irs involved.

as a physician i am con concerned we're approaching this wrong way in the beginning. we should look at who is uncared for not uninsured. the uninsured would fall under this. i'm afraid we're creating a system with still many people underinsured and increasing number on medicaid. we like our safety nets but unfortunately we don't have primary care doctors to take care of them. many don't take medicaid. studies have shown that we're driving more people to the emergency room which is the no the best form of care by any means. that is not the place you go to have your diabetes treated. concern with the doctor/patient relationship being interrupted by structures such as the independent payment advisory board. bill: tell you, marc siegel has been talking about that stuff for three years. i will get to him in a moment. renee ellmers, you voted to defund obamacare. what are you so afraid of? >> well this is a devastating pies of legislation. it is not only going to be devastating to health care as my colleague has pointed out but also to the economy and the workforce. we've seen this over and over again. we actually have those on the

left now, the unions, coming forward and talking about how devastating this will be. this is a bad piece of legislation. unfortunately it is law. it's a bad law and we need to hit it with a strategy and that's what we're trying too do. we in the house, rub rubs talking about -- republican, delaying, man telling and repealing an replacing the whole plan. bill: i don't know if you can do that or not. maybe that comes soon or down the road or maybe that never happens. congressman, what is your solution then? if you're stacked up against the law and you don't like it in the first place, what, how do we dig ourselves out after cornerrer? what would you recommend? >> i think the american people are wanting some changes and reforms and the house of representatives have brought that forward. representative ellmers can talk to you about the proposal that she just put out with the american health care reform act. also we need more health centers that can provide primary care. we need to drive more doctors to

become primary care physicians, particularly in rural areas. i was at an event in harvard. they said marcus welby is gone. get out to the rural areas. bill: this law won't do that, right? it will make it less -- >> we need, more like federally qualified health centers or health centers associated with emergency rooms to drive people into primary care. will get treated appropriately and get preventative care as well. i think that is important if we're really going to improve our health care system. in addition to the reforms we have on the table such as tax reform, individuals can write off their health care insurance, hsas, which allow people to pay with pretax dollars for health care, tort reform. we all agree on state-run subsidies for preexisting conditions and increasing competition across state lines, always improves the product and brings down the cost. bill: i feel like i'm in a time warp. some of the same debates we had three years ago. i don't know if republicans like

yourself have the votes to push that through. renee ellmers, what is your suggestion? what is your solution? >> we need solutions. we need solutions the american people are looking for solution and i will tell you obamacare is simply not boeing to do what has been promised. you know the american people were given an option, they were given promises and those promises have been broken. we've seen this over and over again. the rse plan we rolled out last week, the american health care reform act, has all the essential pieces. of us as brad will tell you, those who have been in health care have known reforms needed to be put in place. that is the silver lining i think with obamacare is that it brought it to the national level for discussion. but we have to replace this with a patient-centered plan. one many of the ideas that brad has discussed just moments ago are in this plan. and it is a solution for health care coverage and it will get more individuals covered by health care. >> do you think it gets off the

ground, this idea? >> i think it does. when the american people are able to see this, as nancy pelosi said, let's pass it so we can see what's in it, the american people didn't have any idea what was in obamacare. we under the rsc, we have a plan. the american people can look at it. this bill can be amended by democrats and republicans to improve upon it. this is a starting point. not an ending point. bill: let me get to the arbiter on our panel, dr. marc siegel. good morning to you. >> good morning, bill. bill: are you able to give us an idea what is coming our way? >> yes, bill. by the way the vote to defund obamacare is a protest vote which is puting a spotlight on this which is good because the american people need to know what is coming their way. the fact is if the government was serious as congressman unstrap said, they could have done it hiring more doctors and building more clinics. with the state exchanges you will see restriction of choices. you will see panels of doctors

that failed in the 1990s that won't allow to you keep your doctor and won't allow you to keep your hospital in many cases. you know what that means? less access to care and not more. for the 90% who have insurance, 27 riglations and provisions are coming down the pike in 2014 that will change the face of health care. bill: marc, quickly, are you saying the sky will fall on 1st of october or is this something that works into the system gradually? >> i'm not chicken little. i don't think the sky will fall. i think people are heading for a lost confusion but not the health care they're expecting or used to. i'm worried about those with employer-based insurance, 170 million people might see the system changes, not just ones going to exchanges. the face of health care is changing. bill: so much to talk about here. we're just scratching the surface. dr. siegel, thank you to you and members the are doctors caucus, thank you to you as well. north carolina and ohio

respectively. of the october 1, next tuesday. >> thanks, bill. martha: we're going back to the u.n. for a couple minutes. that is where president obama was caught an open mic. do people ever learn about the open mics at the u.n.? what he said and maybe why he wishes he hadn't said it.

martha: at this hour in nairobi -- [gunfire] those are the scenes that we've been watching over the past several days and video that came out of the grocery store part where we know there was so much shooting and activity in that mall in kenya. dozens of people we have seen managed to escape. look at these frightening pictures. imagine yourself in this situation with so many people found themselves over the recent

days. many people are dead in this situation. many did make it out alive. some of those who did claimed that they played dead in order to avoid getting killed. we know people were questioned, whether or not they knew information about the koran, about who the mother of mohammed was. so what would you do if you were in this situation? it is frightening to think about. it's a question that cross as lot of people's minds these days as there are more concerns that something like this could happen at home. aaron cohen joins me now, national security expert and founder of ims security. aaron, welcome. good to have you here today. >> thanks for having me. martha: you know i think we all know for those who survive there are a lot of things involved. in some cases it's just luck. they may believe their faith got them through this moment. they may feel they were able to do something that helped them to survive. what kind of things would you tell people who wonder, you know, those who survive, what do they employ?

>> the type of things i would say in terms of how to survive, the first thing is, is you want to move, don't stand still, don't get on the ground, in a ball or be in a clump. if you're not standing in the way of gunfire, you're not being shot. you're physically moving from one point to another. i want to try to give as many specifics. they will be hard to hear. other thing is, if you can get out of the structure, get out of it as quickly as possible, if you're not in that unsterile environment, then you're in a safer place or more stable environment and that is how we refer to it. martha, the other thing is, this will seem kind of harsh, statistically we know that if you can neutralize the threat, get on top of it, the weapon, your chances of surviving will be greater. the fact there are probably hundreds of people inside the mall. there may have been off-duty police officers. we know that there's concealed weapons in kenya. and i'm not suggesting a

90-year-old woman jump on top of an armed al-shabaab terrorist. if you can neutralize the weapon and on top of it, the fight will give you much higher chance of surviving a terror attack, if you can. >> i mean if you are able, in any way to neutralize the attack you're saying and if you feel that you're already being, you're in a confrontation, right? i mean if you're seeing that you are -- >> correct, correct. martha: otherwise you're saying get out, find a way out because a lot of times we know, even from september 11th people were advised to stay in the bidding. do you listen to that advice when you hear it? if you see there is a door you can get out of? >> no, no, i don't. i think it is important to understand what the fight or flight reaction will be. realistically the training, the consulting with corporations for these types of a situation need to be very realistic. people will head to a doorway. that is where they will run. law enforcement has to train to run inside of that doorway as hundreds of people are running out. that training has to be

specific. when i'm training law enforcement or security personnel, it is very important to make sure they understand what is really going to happen. there is a switch that needs to be flipped. we teach you in israel get to the threat and you have to neutralize the threat, point to keep his hands from moving. secretary rift can't move his hand, he can't fire a weapon, he can't hit a detonator, he can not conduct physically the act of terror. it's a mind-set thing but, they can be stopped. martha: you know, it is something to think about, like you prepare for any kind of an emergency in life, think about a couple of these things is becoming something more prevalent, maybe we have to train for, even here at home. aaron, thank you very much. good to talk to you today. >> thank you, martha. bill: there is outrage over a hidden provision in the latest spending bill. should a senator who is multimillionaire get a gift from congress? president obama moments away set to address the u.n. what will he say about syria? what will he say about iran? what will i say about muslim

terrorists? that is minutes away. check it out.

i can't believe your mom has a mom cave! today i have new campbell's chuy spicy chicken quesadilla soup. she gives me chunky before every game. i'm very souperstitious. haha, that's a good one! haha! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup.

it fills you up right.

martha: all right, fox news alert now, because we're moments away from the president delivering his annual address to the united nations general assembly as he faces increasing pressure from congress to stand his ground on the issue of iran. will he talk to the iranian leader? that's one of the big questions. welcome to "america's newsroom," i'm march this maccallum. bill: i'm bill hemmer. iran's new president will make his first appearance as leader of his country at the assembly in a matter of moments, he and president obama not scheduled to formally meet, but the white house saying it's not ruled out something more be informal. what would that entail? if it does happen, it would be the first conversation face to face between the two countries since 1979. martha: the leader of brazil is speaking right now. the president is up next, and our chief white house correspondent, ed henry, is live in our new york newsroom with more on what we can expect

today. good morning, ed. >> reporter: good morning, martha. as bill was suggesting, it could be sort of a sidelines conversation that the president has, it would be something like we saw a couple weeks ago at that g20 summit in russia where president obama did not want a formal one-on-one with vladimir putin but sort of met him on the sidelines. could there be an opening like that today? that's what we're watching for and, in fact, new this morning the iranian foreign minister took to twitter to suggest there's a new openness saying, quote, we have a historic opportunity to resolve the nuclear issue 5+1 plus germany needs to adjust its posture commensurate with new iranian approach. but that right will, the latter part of that, is what troubles the administration's critics, because the suggestion that the u.s. and us allies -- its allies need to make adjustments themselves when, in fact, all the iranians have done is adjust their rhetoric but not their

actions at all. take a will listen to what lady ashton of the european union said yesterday. >> this is our first opportunity to meet face to face. we talked about a number of important issues but focused on the nuclear issue. we had a good and and constructive discussion. bill: so you hear it right there, good and constructive constitution. that might be what we hear from the u.s. and the iranians today, but that's still just talk. we haven't seen any action, we haven't seen, you know, here's what we're going to do to slow down or even stop their thirst for nuclear weapons. they haven't done any of that. martha: it appears what they would want in return would be some relief from some of these sanctions, and it appears obvious that there's skepticism from israel to capitol hill about whether or not they're willing to give anything in return for that possibility. >> reporter: exactly. if you start easing the sanctions against iran which the

obama administration itself has been insisting for the last couple of years, that the sanctions have been crippling to tehran's economy, if you start letting up there, the fear among benjamin netanyahu is this is going to be a repeat of what happened with north korea where they went to the u.n. and suggested they wanted a new day, but it was all rhetoric. then they spent several years while everybody was talking, they spent several years moving forward and obtaining nuclear weapons. interesting that the president got pressure not just from republicans yesterday, but democrat bob menendez from new jersey, he and lindsey graham wrote a letter to the president saying, quote: >> r eporter: that's the key right there, what they put at the end. martha: very important to meet with the president of the united states, and a lot of people feel there has to be some weight

attached to that in terms of concession. ed, thank you. bill: so who is hassan rouhani elected president back in june? he is very new to the job. he was once iran's top nuclear negotiator but stepped down after ahmadinejad was elected president in 2005. often described by western sources as moderate or a more pragmatic conservative. we shall see in time if that is the case. martha: so if and when these two leaders do meet, it would be the first time that the two heads of state for iran and the united states have spoken face to face in more than 30 years. this would be a huge moment and development if it were to happen here at the united nations this week. so look back to 1977 when jimmy carter was the president, and he met with the shah of iran. the u.s. then formally broke diplomatic ties with iran three years later after the u.s. embassy was overrun and hostages were taken in tehran. the u.s. state department has designated the country as a,

quote, state sponsor of terrorism since 1984. bill: during an event yesterday, an open microphone caught the president making a personal remark about himself and a comment about the first lady. just watch here. [laughter] bill: want to go outside and have a quick puff? martha: a lot of men could relate to that statement. bill: six years. if that's the case, he's doing pretty well. that's a bad habit to try and kick. been tough for him. wonder what michelle thinks about that? [laughter] comment forthcoming. all right, fox news alert now, want to take you to the hill because the countdown is on to a potential government shutdown that could happen next monday. right now the senate considering a bill to keep the lights on, but that measure includes a provision to defund obamacare. will that make it through?

a republican senator, ted cruz, vowing to keep that key provision from being stripped out. >> the democrats in this body believe obamacare is good for america, then i would encourage this body let's debate not in the artificial sense in which we debate, one or two senators talking to an empty hall, but in the real sense of making the case to each other and the american people about whether law is working or whether it is not. bill: well, chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel watching this again today. mike, another day now. what is senator cruz specifically pushing for at the moment? >> reporter: well, bill, he's trying to get 41 republican senators to join together to, essentially, hold up this bill. it's, essentially, another form of a filibuster because he realizes that senate majority leader harry reid's going to try to put that obamacare money back into the house-passed bill, so basically his only way of stop toking it is to stop the

procedural bill when it comes up tomorrow. if he can stop reid from getting 60 votes, then bottom line the bill is stuck, but that's tricky because we know that senate republican leader mitch mcconnell and republican whip john cornyn support the house-passed bill because it defunds obamacare, and we've learned that mcconnell and cover anyone are act -- cornyn are actively supporting their colleagues to not go along with cruz. that may make for an interesting luncheon when senate republicans get together today. bottom line, cruz has also tried to argue there should be a 60-vote threshold for amendments such as the amendment that will put the obamacare money back into the bill. harry reid heard the argument, but there's no indication that reid is going to make his own job harder, bill? bill: we asked rand paul about that filibuster last week, and he says his feet still hurt him. and ted cruz is suggesting he may do the same. we'll wait and see if that happens. but you mentioned harry reid, where is he on?

what's he saying? >> reporter: well, he's trying to, essentially, tell his colleagues in the senate there's a certain inevitability, he is going to have the votes at the end of the day to put obamacare money back into the bill. the question is timing. here's more from senator reid on that. >> this week the united states senate will act as quickly as tea party republicans will allow. once the senate has acted, house republicans will face a choice whether to pass a clean, continuing resolution or shut down the federal government. so the question, are extremist republicans really willing to shut down the government? time will only tell. >> reporter: both leader reid and republican leader mitch mcconnell later this hour on the senate floor and then a procedural vote on this bill tomorrow, bill. bill: you'll be watching every twist and turn along the way. thank you, mike. mike emanuel on capitol hill for us. >> reporter: thanks, bill. martha: all right. we are waiting mow for the president -- thousand for the president to come to the podium at the u.n., we expect that will

happen a few minutes from now. we saw moments ago the leader of brazil was speaking, and we're waiting for the president. we'll take you back there as soon as that gets under way. but in the meantime, a stunning development today claims that a fugitive female terrorist is among the dead in the kenya mall attack. the woman who was dubbed the white widow could be behind the massacre there. she is british, she is a mother of two. her real name is samantha luthwaite, she was married to a suicide bomber who was part of the 2005 london subway attack, and since then she has been on the run, a fugitive from the law, and she may have resurfaced in kenya. greg talcott joins us now live in london with a little bit more on this story this morning. good morning, greg. >> reporter: hey, martha, yes. a lot of attention being paid to this woman as a possible key player in those kenyan terror attacks and also a good example, the international links to that

terror. speculation revved up when overnight the kenyan foreign minister said that along with two or three americans, she believed a british woman was among a the attackers, and she has been involved with terrorism many times. we'll have more as the day develops. back to you, martha. martha: all right, thanks so much. we're going to go pack to the u.n. where president obama has stepped in front of the podium. >> settled through the sword and the clash of armies. the idea that nations and peoples could come together in peace to solve their disputes and advance a common prosperity seemed unimaginable. it took the awful carnage of two world wars to shift our thinking. the leaders who built the united nations were not naive, they did not think this body could eradicate all wars. but in the wake of millions dead and continents in rubble and with the development of nuclear

weapons that could annihilate a planet, they understood that humanity could not survive the course it was on. so they gave us this institution. believing that it could allow us to resolve conflicts, enforce rules of behavior and build habits of cooperation that would grow stronger over time. now, for decades the united nations has, in fact, made a difference from helping to eradicate disease to educating children to brokering peace. but like every generation of leaders, we face new and probe found challenges -- profound challenges, and this body continues to be tested. the question is whether we possess the wisdom and the courage as nation-states and members of an international community to squarely meet those challenges. whether the united nations can

meet the test of our time. for much of my tenure as president, some of our most urgent challenges have revolved around an increasingly integrated global economy, and our efforts to recover from the worst economic crisis of our lifetime. now, five years after the global economy collapsed, and thanks to coordinated efforts by the countries here today, jobs are being created, global financial systems have stabilized, and people are once again being lifted up out of poverty. but this progress is fragile and unequal, and we still have work to do together to assure that our citizens can access the opportunities that they need to thrive in the 21st century. together we've also worked to end a decade of war. five yeaarly 180,000

americans were serving in harm's way, and the war in iraq was the dominant issue in our relationship with the rest of the world. today all of our troops have left iraq. next year an international coalition will end its war in afghanistan having achieved its mission of dismantling the core of al-qaeda that attacked us on 9/11. for the united states, these new circumstances have also meant shifting away from a perpetual war footing. beyond bringing our troops home, we have limited the use of drones so they target only those who pose a continuing imminent threat to the united states where capture is not feasible and there's a near surgeonty of no civil -- certainty of no civilian casualties. we're transferring detainees to other countries and trying terrorists in courts of law while working diligently to close the prison at guantanamo bay. and just as we reviewed how we deploy our extraordinary

military capabilities in a way that lives up to our ideals, we've begun to review the way that we gather intelligence so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share. as a result of this work and cooperation with allies and partners, the world is more stable than it was five years ago. but even a glance at today's headlines indicates that dangers remain. in kenya we've seen terrorists target innocent civilians in a crowded shopping mall, and our hearts go out to the families of those who have been affected. in pakistan nearly 100 people were recently killed by suicide bombers outside a church. in iraq killings and car bombs continue to be a terrible part of life.

meanwhile, al-qaeda has splintered into regional networks and militias which doesn't give them the capacity at this point to carry out attacks like 9/11, but it does pose serious threats to governments and diplomats, businesses and and civilians all across the globe. just as significantly, the convulsions in the middle east and north africa have laid bare deep divisions within societies as an old order is upended and people grapple with what comes next. peaceful movements have too often been answered by violence from those resisting change and from extremists trying to hijack change. sectarian conflict has reemerged, and the potential spread of weapons of mass destruction comets to cast a shadow -- continues to cast a shadow over the pursuit of

peace. nowhere have we seen these trends can converge more powerfully than in syria. their peaceful protests against an authoritarian regime were met with repression and slaughter. in the face of such carnage, many retreated to their sectarian identities,al white and sunni, christian and kurd. and the situation spiraled into civil war. the international community recognized the stakes early on, but our response has not matched the scale of the challenge. aid cannot keep pace with the suffering of the wounded and displaced. a peace process is stillborn. america and others have worked to bolster the moderate opposition, but extremist groups have still taken root to exploit the crisis. assad's traditional allies have propped him up, citing

principles of sovereignty to shield his regime. and on august 21st, the regime used chemical weapons in an attack that killed more than 1 is ,000 people including hundreds -- 1,000 people including hundreds of children. now, the crisis in syria and the destabilization of the region goes to the heart of broader challenges that the international community must now confront. how should we respond the conflicts in the middle east and north africa? conflicts between countries, but also conflicts within them. how do we address the choice of standing callously by while children are subjected to nerve gas or embroiling ourselves in someone else's civil war? what's the role of force in resolving disputes that threaten the stability of the region and

undermine all basic standards of civilized conduct? and what's the role of the united nations and international law in meeting cries for justice? today i want to outline where the united states of america stands on these issues. with respect to syria, we believe that as a starting point, the international community must enforce the ban on chemical weapons. when i stated my willingness to order a limited strike existence the assad -- against the assad regime in response to the brazen use of chemical weapons, i did not do so lightly. i did so because i believe it is in the national security interests of the united states and in the interests of the world to meaningfully enforce a prohibition whose origins are older than the united nations itself.

the ban against the use of chemical weapons, even in war, has been agreed to by 98% of humanity. it is strengthened by the sering memories of soldiers suffocating in the trenches, jews slaughtered in gas chambers, iranians poisoned in the many tens of thousands. the evidence is overwhelming that the assad regime used such weapons on august 21st. u.n. inspectors gave a clear accounting that advanced rockets fired large quantities of sarin gas at civilians. these rockets were fired from a regime-controlled neighborhood. and landed in opposition neighborhoods. it's an insult to human reason and to the legitimacy of this institution to suggest that anyone other than the regime carried out this attack.

now, i know that in the immediate aftermath of the attack there were those who questioned the legitimacy of even a limited strike in the absence of a clear mandate from the security council. but without a credible military threat, the security council had demonstrated no inclination to act at all. however, as i've discussed with president putin for over a year most recently in st. petersburg, my preference has always been a diplomatic resolution to this issue. and in the past several weeks, the united states, russia and our allies have reached an agreement to place syria's chemical weapons under international control and then to destroy them. the syrian government took a first step by giving an accounting of its stockpiles.

now there must be a strong security council resolution to verify that the assad regime is keeping its commitments, and there must be consequences if they fail to do so. if we cannot agree even on this, then it will show that the united nations is incapable of enforcing the most basic of international laws. on the other hand, if we succeed, it will send a powerful message that the use of chemical weapons has no place in the 21st century. and that this body means what it says. now, agreement on chemical weapons should energize a larger diplomatic effort to reach a political settlement within syria. i do not believe that military action by those within syria or

by with external powers can achieve a lasting peace. nor do i believe that america or any nation should determine who will lead syria. that is for the syrian people to decide. nevertheless, a leader who slaughtered his citizens and gassed children to death cannot regain the legitimacy to lead a badly-fractured country. notion that syria can somehow return to a pre-war status quo is a fantasy. so it's time for russia and iran to realize that insisting on assad's rule will lead directly to the outcome that they fear, an increasingly violent space for extremists to operate. in turn, those of us who continue to support the moderate opposition must persuade them that the syrian people cannot afford a collapse of state institutions and that a

political settlement cannot be reached without addressing the legitimate fears and concerns offal whites and other -- of alawites and other minorities. we are committed to working this political track, and as we pursue a settlement, let's remember this is not a zero sum endeavor. we're no longer in a cold war. there's no great game to be won. nor does america have any interest in syria beyond the well being of its people, the stability of its neighbors, the elimination of chemical weapons and insuring that it does not become a safe haven for terrorists. i welcome the influence of all nations that can help bring about a peaceful resolution of syria's civil war. and as we move the geneva process forward, i urge all nations here to step up to meet humanitarian needs in syria and surrounding countries.

america's committed over a billion dollars to this effort. today i can announce that we will be providing an additional $340 million. no aid can take the place of a political resolution that gives the syrian people the chance to rebuild their country, but it can help desperate people to survive. what broader conclusions can be drawn from measuring's policy towards -- america's policy towards syria? i know there are those who have been frustrated by our unwillingness to use our military might to depose assad and believe that a failure to do so indicates a weakening of american resolve in the region. others have suggested that my willingness to direct even limited military strikes to deter the further use of chemical weapons shows we've learned nothing from iraq and that america continues to seek control over the middle east for our own purposes.

in this way, the situation in syria mirrors the contradiction that has persisted in the region for decades. the united states is chastised for meddling in the region, accused of having a hand in all manner of conspiracy, at the same time the united states is blamed for failing to do enough to solve the region's problems and for showing indifference towards suffering muslim populations. i realize some of this is inevitable given america's role in the world. but these contradictory attitudes have a practical impact on the american people's support for our involvement in the region. and allow leaders in the region, as well as the international community sometimes, to avoid addressing difficult problems themselves. finish so let me take this opportunity to outline what has been u.s. policy towards the middle east and north africa and what will be my policy during the remainder of my presidency.

the united states of america is prepared to use all elements of our power, including military force, to secure our core interests in the region. we will confront external aggression against our allies and partners, as we did in the gulf war. we will insure the free flow of energy from the region to to the world, although america's steadily reducing our own dependence on imported oil, the world still depends on the region's energy supply, and a severe disruption could destabilize the entire global economy. we will dismantle terrorist networks that threaten our people. wherever possible, we will build the capacity of our partners, respect the sovereignty of nations and work to address the root causes of terror, but when it's necessary to defend the united states against terrorist attack, we will take direct action.

and finally, we will not tolerate the development or use of weapons of mass destruction. just as we considered the use of chemical weapons in syria to be a threat to our own national security, we reject the development of nuclear weapons that could trigger a nuclear arms race in the region and undermine the global non-proliferation regime. now, to say that these are america's core interests is not to say that they are our only interests. we deeply believe it is in our interests to see a middle and north africa that is peaceful and prosperous. and we'll continue to promote democracy and human rights and open markets because we believe these practices achieve peace and prosperity. but i also believe that we can rarely achieve these objectives through unilateral american

action, particularly through military action. iraq shows us that democracy cannot simply be imposed by force. rather, these objectives are best achieved when we partner with the international community and with the countries and peoples of the region. so what does this mean going forward? in the near term, america's diplomatic efforts will focus on two particular issues; iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the arab/israeli conflict. while these issues are not the cause of all the region's problems, they have been a major source of instability for far too long, and resolving them can help serve as a foundation for a broader peace. the united states and iran have

been isolated from one another since the islamic revolution of 1979. this mistrust has deep roots. iranians have long complained of a history of u.s. interference in their affairs and of america's role in overthrowing an iranian government during the cold war. on the other hand, americans see an iranian government that has declared the united states an enemy and directly or through proxies taken american hostages, killed u.s. troops can and civilians and threatened our ally, israel, with destruction. i don't believe this difficult history can be overcome overnight. the suspicions run too deep. but i do believe that if we can resolve the issue of iran's nuclear program, that can serve as a major step down a long road towards a different

relationship. one based on mutual interests and mutual respect. since i took office i've made it clear in letters to the supreme leader in iran and more recently to president rouhani that america prefers to resolve our concerns over iran's nuclear program peacefully, although we are determined to prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. we are not seeking regime change, and we respect the right of the iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy. instead, we insist that the iranian government meets its responsibilities under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and u.n. security council resolutions. meanwhile, the supreme leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and president rouhani has just recently reiterated that the

islamic republic will never develop a nuclear weapon. so these statements made by our respective governments should offer the basis for a meaningful agreement. we should be able to achieve a resolution that respects the rights of the iranian people while giving the world confidence that the iranian program is peaceful. but to succeed, conciliatory words will have to be matched by actions that are transparent and verifiable. after all, it's the iranian government's choices that have led to the comprehensive sanctions that are currently in place, and this is not simply an issue between the united states and iran. the world has seen iran evade its responsibilities in the past and has an abiding interest in making sure that iran meets its obligations in the future.

but i want to be clear, we are encouraged that president rouhani received from the iranian people a mandate to pursue a more moderate course, and given can president rouhani's stated commitment to reach an agreement, i am directing john kerry to pursue this effort with the iranian government in close cooperation with the european union, the united kingdom, france, germany, russia and china. the roadblocks may prove to ooh great, but i firmly believe the diplomatic path must be tested because iran's genuine commitment to go down a different path will be good for the region and the world. and it will help the iranian people meet their extraordinary potential in commerce and culture, in science and education. we are also determined to resolve a conflict that goes

back even further than our differences with iran, and that is the conflict between palestinians and israelis. i've made it clear that the united states will never compromise our commitment to israel's security, nor our support for its existence as a jewish state. earlier this year in jerusalem i was inspired by young israelis who stood up for the belief that peace was necessary, just and possible, and i believe there's a growing recognition within israel that the occupation of the west bank is tearing at the democratic fabric of the jewish state. but the children of israel have the right to live in a world where the nations assembled in this body fully recognize their country. and where we unequivocally reject those who fire rockets at fairholmes -- at their homes or uncite others to hate them.

likewise, the united states remains committed to the belief that the palestinian people have a right to live with -- [inaudible] on the same trip, i had the opportunity to meet with young palestinians in ramallah whose ambition and incredible potential are matched by the pain they feel in having no firm place in the community of nations. they are understandably cynical that real progress will ever be made, and they're frustrated by their families enduring the daily indignity of occupation. but they, too, recognize that two states is the only real path to peace. because just as the palestinian people must not be dismaced, the state of us -- displaced, the state of israel is here to stay. so the time is now right for the entire international community

to get behind the pursuit of peace. already israeli and palestinian leaders have demonstrated a willingness to take significant political risks. president abbas has put aside efforts to shortcut the pursuit of peace and come to the negotiating table, prime minister netanyahu has released pal the tin yang prisoners and re-- palestinian prisoners and reaffirmed his commitment to a palestinian state. current talks are focused on final status issues of borders and security, refugees and jerusalem. so now the rest of us must be willing to take risks as well. friends of israel, including the united states, must recognize that israel's security as a jewish and democratic state fend on the realization of -- depend on the realization of a palestinian state. and we should say so clearly. arab states and those who supported the palestinians must

recognize that stability will only be served through a two-state solution and a secure israel. all of us must recognize that peace will be a powerful tool to defeat extremists throughout the region and embolden those who are prepared to build a better future. and moreover, ties of trade and commerce between israelis and arabs could be an engine of growth and opportunity at a time when too many young people in the region are languishing without work. so let's emerge from the familiar corners of blame and prejudice, let's support israeli and palestinian leaders who are prepared to walk the difficult road to peace. real breakthroughs on these two issues -- iran's nuclear program and israeli/palestinian peace -- would have a profound and positive impact be on the entire

middle east and north africa. but the current convulsions arising out of the arab spring remind us that a just and lasting peace cannot be measured only by agreements between nations. it must also be measured by our ability to resolve conflict and promote justice within nations. and by that measure, it's clear that all of us have a lot more work to do. when peaceful transitions began in tunisia and egypt, the entire with world was filled with hope. and although the united states, like others, was struck by the speed of transition and although we did not and, in fact, could not dictate events, we chose to support those who called for change. and we did so based on the belief that while these transitions will be hard and

take time, society is based upon -- societies based upon democracy and endness of the individual will ultimately be more stable, more prosperous and more peaceful. over the last few years, particularly in egypt, we've seen just how hard this transition will be. mohamed morsi was democratically elected but proved unwilling or unable to govern in a way that was fully inclusive. the interim government that replaced him responded to the desires of millions of egyptians who believed the revolution had taken a wrong turn, but it too has made decisions inconsistent with inclusive democracy. through an emergency law and restrictions on the press and civil society and opposition parties. of course, america's been attacked by all sides of this internal conflict, simultaneously accused of

supporting the muslim brotherhood and engineering the removal of power. in fact, the united states has purposely avoided choosing sides. our overriding interests throughout these past few years has been to encourage a government that legitimately reflects the will of the egyptian people and recognizes true democracy is requiring a respect for minority rights and the rule of law, freedom of speech and assembly and a strong civil society. that remains our interest today. and so going forward the united states will maintain a constructive relationship with the interim government that promotes core interests like the camp david accords on counterterrorism, we'll continue support on areas like education that directly benefit the egyptian people, but we have not proceeded with the delivery of certain military systems, and our support will depend upon

egypt's progress in you are suing a --be in pursuing a more democratic path. and our approach to egypt reflects a larger point. the united states will at times work with governments that do not meet -- at least in our view -- the highest international expectations but who work with us on our core interests. nevertheless, we will not stop asserting principles that are consistent with our ideals, whether that means opposing the use of violence as a means of suppressing dissent or supporting the principles embodied in the universal declaration of human rights. we will reject the notion that these principles are simply western exports, incompatible with islam or the arab world. we believe they are the birthright of every person. and while we recognize that our influence will at times be limited, although we will be wary of efforts to impose

democracy through military force , and although we will at times be accused of hypocrisy and inconsistency, we will be engaged in the region for the long haul. for the hard work of forging freedom and democracy is the task of a generation. and this includes efforts to resolve sectarian tensions that continue to surface in places like iraq, bahrain and syria. we understand such longstanding issues cannot be solved by outsiders, they must be addressed by muslim communities themselves. but we've seen grinding conflicts come to an end before, most recently in northern ireland where catholics and protestants finally recognized that an endless cycle of conflict was causing both communities to fall behind a fast-moving world. and so we believe those same

sectarian conflicts can be overcome in the middle east and north africa. to summarize, the united states has a hard-earned humility when it comes to our ability to determine events inside other countries. you know, the notion of american empire may be useful propaganda, but it isn't borne out by america's current policy or by public opinion. indeed, as recent debates within the united states over syria clearly show, the danger for the world with is not an america that is too eager to immerse itself in the affairs of other countries or to take on every problem in the region as it's own. the danger for the world is that the united states after a decade of war, rightly concerned about issues back home, aware of the hostilities that our engagement

in the region has engendered throughout the muslim world may disengage, creating a vacuum of leadership that no other nation is ready to fill. now, i believe such disengagement would be a mistake. i believe america must remain engaged for our own security, but i also believe the world is better for it. some may disagree. but i believe america is exceptional in part because we have shown a willingness through the sacrifice of blood and treasure to stand up not only for our own narrow self-interests, but for the interests of all. i must be honest though, we're far more likely to invest our energy in those countries that want to work with us, that invest in their people instead of a corrupt few, that embrace a vision of society where everyone

can contribute, men and women, shia or sunni, muslim, christian or jew. because from europe to asia, from africa to the americas, nations that have persevered on a democratic path have emerged more prosperous, more peaceful and more invested in upholding our common security and our common humanity. and i believe that the same will hold true for the arab world. this leads me to a final point. there will be times when the breakdown of societies so -- is so great, the violence against civilians so substantial that the international community will be called upon to act. this will require new tig and some very tough -- new thinking and some very tough choices. while the united nations was designed to prevent wars between

states, increasingly we face the challenge of preventing slaughter within states. and these challenges will grow more pronounced as we are confronted with states that are fragile or failing, places where horrendous violence can put innocent men, women and children at risk with no hope of protection from their national institutions. i've made it clear that even when america's core interests are not directly threatened, we stand ready to do our part to prevent mass atrocities and protect basic human rights. but we cannot and should not bear that burden alone. many -- in mali, we supported the french intervention that successfully pushed back al-qaeda and the african forces who are keeping the peace. in eastern africa we are working

with partners to bring the lord's resistance army to an end, and in libya when the security council provided a mandate to protect civilians, america joined a coalition that took action. because of what we did there, countless lives were saved, and a tyrant could not kill his way back to power. i know that some now criticize the action in libya as an object lesson, they point to the problems that the country now confronts, a democratically-elected government struggling to provide security, armed groups in some places, extremists ruling parts of a fractured land. so these critics argue any intervention to protect civilians is doomed to fail. look at libya. no one's more mindful of these problems than i am, for they resulted in the death of four outstanding u.s. citizens who were committed to the libyan people including ambassador

chris stevens, a man whose courageous efforts helped save the city of benghazi. but does anyone truly believe that the situation in libya would be better if gadhafi had been allowed to kill, imprison or brutalize his people into submission? it's far more likely that without international action libya would now be engulfed in civil war and bloodshed. we live in a world of imperfect choices. different nations will not agree on the need for action in every instance, and the principle of sovereignty is at the center of our international order. but sovereignty cannot be a shield for tyrants to commit one murder or an excuse for the international community to turn a blind eye. while we need to be modest in our belief that we can remedy every evil, while we need to be

mindful that the world is full of unintended consequences, should we really accept the notion that the powerless in the face of a rwanda? if that's the world that a people want to live in, they should say so and reckon with the cold logic of mass graves. but i believe we can embrace a different future. and if we don't want to choose between inaction and war, we must get better, all of us, at the policies that prevent the breakdown of basic order. through respect for the responsibilities of nations and the rights of individuals, through meaningful sanctions for those who break the rules, through dogged diplomacy that resolves the root causes of conflict, not merely its aftermath, through development assistance that brings hope to the marginalized. and, yes, sometimes -- although

although -- [inaudible] there are going to be moments where the international community will need to acknowledge that the multilateral use of military force may be required to prevent the very worst from occurring. ultimately, this is the international community that america seeks. one where nations do note land r nations, but one in which we carry out the founding purpose of this institution and where we all take responsibility, a world in which the rules established out of the horrors of war can help us resolve conflicts peacefully and prevent the kinds of wars that our forefathers fought. a world where human beings can live with dignity and meet their basic needs whether they live in new york or knew robe be by -- nairobi or damascus. these are extraordinary times

with extraordinary opportunities. thanks to human progress, a child born anywhere on earth today can do things that 60 years ago would have been out of reach for the mass of humanity. i saw this in africa where nations moving beyond conflict are now poised to take off, and america's with them partnering to feed the hungry and care for the sick and to bring power to places off the grid. i see it across the pacific region where hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty in a single generation. i see it in the faces of young people everywhere who have access to the entire world with the click of a button and who are eager to join the cause of eradicating extreme poverty and combating climate change, starting businesses, expanding freedom and leaving behind the old ideological battles of the past. that's what's happening in asia, in africa, it's happening in

europe and across the americas. that's the future that the people of the middle east and north africa deserve as well. one where they can focus on opportunity instead of whether they'll be killed or repressed because of who they are or what they believe. time and again nations and people have shown our capacity to change, to live up to humanity's highest ideals, to choose our better history. last month i stood where 50 years ago martin luther king jr. told america about his dream at a time when many people of my race could not even vote for president. earlier this year i stood in the small cell where nelson mandela endured decades cut off from his own people and the world. who are we to believe that today's challenges cannot be

overcome when we've seen what changes the human spirit can bring? who in this hall can argue that the future belongs to those who seek to repress that spirit rather than those who seek to liberate it? i know what side of history i want the united states of america to be on. we're ready to meet tomorrow's challenges with you, firm in the belief that all men and women are, in fact, created equal, each individual possessed with a dignity and inalienable rights that cannot be denied. that is why we look to the future not with fear, but with hope, and that's why we remain convinced that this community of nations can deliver a more peaceful, prosperous and just world to the next generation. thank you very much. [applause] bill: 42 minutes on the clock, two major issues, syria and also the country of iran. with regard to syria, the

president saying it's gotten a lot of attention, assad is responsible, an insult to think that anyone else carried out that chemical attack. he also said $340 million would go to more humanitarian support, that is one headline. with regard to iran -- and much of the speech was centered on iran -- the president talking about the relationship between the u.s. and iran for the better part of three decades. the mistrust has deep roots, but america prefers to resolve this peacefully, appointing john kerry, secretary of state, to pursuing nuclear weapons agreement. two comments early in the speech that perhaps will get a lot of attention. number one, the world is more stable than it was five years ago. he said that right before remarking on the ongoing situation in kenya where he talked about terrorists targeting innocent civilians and suicide bombers taking out christians in pakistan just this week. he did not mention that christians were the targets, and he did not mention that muslims were the terrorists in either kenya or pakistan.

many will pick be up on both those points as we go throughout the day. here's martha now with more. martha: let's get to reaction with john bolton, former u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and fox news contributor. so you were listening along with us, ambassador. what'd you think? >> well, it was a long, meandering speech, a very self-referential defense of the past four-and-a-half years of the administration's policy, in respects not a lot that was new. but on the key points, i think there were three, syria, iran, the arab/israeli issue. on syria, a fairly remarkable criticism of russia and iran right there in the general assembly for supporting the assad regime. i thought it was notable, it's certainly true, that they've kept assad in power. how that's going to help get a security council resolution to deal with the syrian chemical weapons issue, somewhat hard to discern. on iran, very clear now we are involved in a lengthy diplomatic

process, negotiations that could stretch as far as the eye could see on the nuclear weapons program. i think that, essentially, that guarantees that iran is free from the threat of certainly a u.s. military strike. pressure will now go to israel to see what they do. the thing that was most striking about the president's comments on iran was the moral equivalency with which he viewed the differences between the two countries. you know, iranians have their suspicions about american interference during the cold war, americans have their suspicions because of taking hostages and killing americans in iraq. that's all sort of the same thing, we need to work that through. that, to me, is not a very sound approach for an american president going into negotiations. and then on the arab/israeli conflict where i don't think there was much new on substance, the president again used a phrase that i think colors his view of how this issue should be

resolved. he talked about, his phrase, the occupation of the west bank which is a way of saying that all of the territory beyond the '67 borders that israel controls is occupied territory, which has essentially been the palestinian position for a long time. so i think it was striking how the 95 of the speech was on the middle east -- 95% of the speech was on the middle east. not much of a pivot to asia which the president had talked about before, and i think it's a road map for the next couple of years how the administration will proceed. martha: no mention of radical islamic jihad when -- >> well, that's not a problem. that's not a problem. it's really israeli apartment construction in east jerusalem and that sort of thing. i just, i think this was a very clear view of the president's take on the world, what his assessment is. martha: we've got to leave it there, ambassador, thank you very much. we'll take a quick break, we'll be right back.

>> thank you. when we made our commitment to the gulf, bp had two big goals:

help the gulf recover and learn from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, whe experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

bill: going to be a phenomenal nine seconds here. martha: indeed. wind the clock down to the end of "america's newsroom." thanks so much for being here everybody. we'll see you back here tomorrow. "happening now" starts right now. jenna: we start off with a fox news alert on three developing stories this hour. the president wrapping up a highly-anticipated address to the u.n. general assembly. new reactions moments away on that. as the president spoke demonstrators protested outside the u.n. against the iranian government and its continued human rights abuses and sponsorship of terror. they say the iranian president should be punished for having blood on his hand a big issue today. also reaching a boiling point on capitol hill, a showdown how to spend your tax dollars intensifies, not only between democrats and republicans but within the gop itself. what it could mean to you with a possible government shutdown just days away. more people die inside of a shopping mall