we are fighting for india. why are we not asking india to take part in this right now? it could be a terrible problem for india before it becomes any problem for the u.s. it is almost like we're trying to fight the in the award. where we doing that without asking for direct help from india? and we can hire indian troops to fight in afghanistan under our command. guest: this is one thing i like about going on c-span is that you really do get thoughtful and informed questions. the caller as to the heart of a problem in many ways. the military and pakistan continues to think that the biggest threat it faces is not terrorism, but india. in fact, there is evidence that some of the billions of dollars of aid that we have given them since 9/11 has gone to improving pakistan's nuclear arsenal. this is a terrible thing. you really do not want them to be spending the aid money that we give them to build nuclear weapons. what we need to get is a pakistan that reorients away from confronting india and more toward dealing with its internal stability problems, its corruption, and it'

a deterrent against india.at some of the two will go to war and will become a nuclear war. the second, which you see a lot in the press, is that pakistan's nuclear arsenal is unsafe, because it could be captured by extremists, but that taliban. -- by the taliban. so far, the nuclear arsenal is well protected and well controlled by the pakistani military. until we see signs that the military is falling apart itself, i think the nuclear arsenal is probably not something that should be of primary concern. çguest: in afghanistan, india s been very helpful economically, building roads, turning the afghans. at the same time, we have been very -- training afghan street -- training afghans. at the same time, we've been very sensitive to pakistani concerns about india. we have focused on economic assistance but not getting into military assistance, because it would be hugely counterproductive. this is the kind balancing diplomacy we need to do. guest: not well enough, i think. i want to add, because i forgot to put tha

. >> ifill: and the search for treatment for the mentally ill on the streets of india. >> brown: that's all ahead, on tonight's pbs newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by: >> this is the engine that connects abundant grain from the american heartland to haran's best selling whole wheat, while keeping 60 billion pounds of carbon out of the atmosphere every year. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> what makes us an engine for the economy? plants across america. nearly 200,000 jobs created. we see beyond cars. >> chevron. this is the power of human energy. >> intel. supporting math and science education for tomorrow's innovators. and the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> brown: president obama sharpened his criticism today of security failures that led to last

a deterrent against india. turning the afghans. at the same time, we have been very -- training afghan street -- training afghans. at the same time, we've been very sensitive to pakistani concerns about india. we have focused on economic assistance but not getting into military assistance, because it would be hugely counterproductive. this is the kind balancing diplomacy we need to do. guest: not well enough, i think. i want to add, because i forgot to put that in my answer to the gentleman's question -- the indian establishment of consulates and its large assistance program in afghanistan is one of the things that worries pakistan. they see themselves being surrounded by their primordial enemy, india. his father at them and still bothers them. -- this bothers them and still bothers them. guest: even paranoid have real enemies. host: let us look at comments the president made in oslo. >> america's commitment to global security will never waiver, but in a world where threats are more diffuse and complex, america

. >> woodruff: a report from india about moves to combat one of the country's main sources of pollution. >> lehrer: our special correspondent for education john merrow reports from arizona on a special way to help troubled public schools. >> i was shocked. it really took me back. >> to... >> to just see what was possible. you know, i just kind of had to pause and say, you know, what a difference this makes. >> woodruff: and an inside view of the mexican army's war on drugs. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's "pbs newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by: >> what the world needs now is energy. the energy to get the economy humming again. the energy to tackle challenges like climate change. what is that energy came from an energy company? everyday, chevron invests $62 million in people, in ideas-- seeking, teaching, building. fueling growth around the world to move us all ahead. this is the power of human energy. chevron. >> this is the engine that every year. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> what makes us an engine for the economy? plants across america. ne

and for kashmir and its target has been above all india but it's evolved. and it has kind of a para military commando stale flavor to it because a lot of the people who have strained the recruits are people connected to the pakistani security forces. >> what was headley trained to do? he wasn't trained to be a commando he was trained to do what? >> it appears he did repeated trips to the camps so it appears he did different types of training but it's clear that this is someone who had some kind of training in trade craft in techniques of espionage. this was someone who was able to talk his way in, for example, to the offices of this newspaper in denmark pretending to be wanting to sell ads for his business. he's someone who had training that appears in para military activity but also very sophisticated surveillance espionage activities as well. >> lehrer: what's known about his motives? what's behind all this? >> there are intercepts and telephone conversations in the charging documents that suggests he's true believing idea lawlg and a fundamental and extr

links to yemen; raising healthier, bter educat children in mexico; and helpor the mentally ill in india. but fit: striking the right balance tween security and sacrifice: the costs of preventing the next atck. for that, we turn toary schiavo, forr inspector genel of the department of transporation. she's now anviation attorney in private practice, a represents many of the filies whose relatis were killed in the 9/11 attacks. and david schanzer. he's the director of the triangleenter on terrorism and holand security at duke university and the univeity of north calina. i want to start by asking yo what the preside had to say toda he saithere was a systemic failure, a mix of human and systemic failure. what does that meato yo >> well, that means that there's more than one il. obviously first an foremost that peoplfollowed the screeninthat failed, but obviously the various tch list. the watch listwere targeted and revealed to be a probl in the summ of this year. there waa special report done by the office ofnspector general, coness has addressed these issues, ey knew that the screening wasn

dealing with a sovereign country that has a clear idea of who they think their overall enemy is, namely india. but who have slowly been convinced because of what's happened in sight of their own territory that they have to take action. and i think that will continue to lead to positive steps. >> thank you. senator feingold. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman. it's an honor to have this distinguished panel of witnesses today. i am pleased the president said a goal for when we will begin

but now he has been charged with helping to plan the didley mumbai attacks in india last year. darrah binnun number brass within the united states.

we are fighting for india. why are we not asking india to take part in this right now?it could be a terrible problem for india before it becomes any problem for the u.s. it is almost like we're trying to fight the in the award. where we doing that without asking for direct help from india? and we can hire indian troops to fight in afghanistan under our command. guest: this is one thing i like about going on c-span is that you really do get thoughtful and informed questions. the caller as to the heart of a problem in many ways. the military and pakistan continues to think that the biggest threat it faces is not terrorism, but india. in fact, there is evidence that some of the billions of dollars of aid that we have given them since 9/11 has gone to improving pakistan's nuclear arsenal. this is a terrible thing. you really do not want them to be spending the aid money that we give them to build nuclear weapons. what we need to get is a pakistan that reorients away from confronting india and more toward dealing with its internal stability problems, its corruption, and it's

so i think india does have a huge roll to play here. in india, the caller is right. has a much more direct interest. if pakistan breaks up. never been a really coherent country but is becoming a less coherent country now. the northwest front tear has always been kind of an outlyer. baluchstan is having more turmoil. punjab, one of the core provinces is looking tumultuous, unstable. yes a pakistan that breaks up and had nuclear weapons loose and islamic extremists would be a problem for us but would be a real problem, immediate problem for pakistan, for india. i don't think india would stand by and let that happen, let loose nukes float around. i think they would intervene and then you would have a war and civil war probably in pakistan. if you want to solve afghanistan you need to solve pakistan. if you want to solve pakistan you need to get somehow peace between pakistan and india. >> host: is there discussion within the obama administration getting india to have more of a public role in the pakistan-afghanistan equation? >> guest: when richard holbrooke came in as

state, and it's right across mainland china for example and growing fast in india and australia. slowly in europe but is growing. >> host: i'm afraid it is not just children who don't know what is out there. we live in the world now where wild places are isolated from the places where we all live most of us. >> guest: except we are urban sprawl nurse deeper and deeper into the lost places which is a total nightmare. >> host: i think as a result it is just not the same thing if you see it on tv or even in an imax theater so let me ask this question: if you could take the world that lives in the suburbs to a place where they could have the kind of epiphany that turn someone into a field biologist -- [laughter] -- where would you take him? how do you show them? >> guest: i've done that and i think to start with it is really important that they don't go anywhere to exotic. but to go somewhere that this lovely, safe, not filled with danger but where they can hear the birds singing, where there are streams and they can see the fish and maybe frogs and perhaps there is some deer that ki

if you can say well, we can't cut our greenhouse gas emissions because, after all, india and china andbrazil and some other rapidly developing countries are not cutting there's, would be unfair to put our citizens on a phase a burden while these other people continue to pollute, forgetting, you know, western europe and the united states has been polluting for 200 years and china and india are just getting started. instead of stepping back and saying i have a different plan, we will unilaterally imposed a very high taxes on fossil fuel use. two main fossil fuel uses that are heavy polluters, gasoline, you know that. maybe you know, maybe you don't know, fertilize. fertilizer is a bigger greenhouse gas emitter than gasoline. so if we put a heavy tax on fertilizer and on gasoline, it would be more expensive to drive big cars, and he will be more expensive to buy produce at the supermarket. now we can figure out why this doesn't happen. we could use those tax dollars to help compensate the indians, the chinese and so forth, for switching to cleaner energy sources. and we could use some of

state, and it's right across china and growing fast in india and australia, slowly in europe but it is growing. >> host: i'm afraid that didn't -- not just children who don't know what is out there. we live in a world now where wild places are isolated from the places where we all live, most of us. >> guest: except that we're getting deeper and deeper into those last while place, which is a total nightmare. >> host: as a result, it's just not the same thing when you see it on tv or even in an i-max teeter. if you could take the world that lives in the suburbs to a place where they could have the kind of epiphany that makes someone want to take their mother into the jung toll -- jungle to look at chim pan seize, how do you -- >> guest: i have done it. the thing to start with, it's important they don't go anywhere too exotic, that they go somewhere that is lovely, safe, you know, not too filled with dangers, but where they can hear the birds singing, where the little clear streams, they can see the fish and maybe some frogs, and perhaps some deer there. that kind of place so they're not

guest: he is actually the most popular columnist in the india recently. -- in india recently. he takes forward-looking the ideas, talks to people are around the world and is able to package them in a way that speaks to a broad columnist. host: how did you discover that he was the most popular in india? guest: i think i read it in a newspaper. host: is that because he is so popular, or because there are so many people reading his column? next phone call. caller: good morning. bill kristol, and there are sort of like mad scientists, they had never met a muslim they would not want to bomb. and did sarah palin make the list? guest: she did not. we saw the extent of her global fought in the campaign. i will leave it there. host: next phone call. caller: i believe barack obama is not a marxist. he is a good thinker, tries to plan things out. our country is about pulling together and trying to make things work, no matter your politics. i think if everyone knew what the rich things of america, they think nothing of view. i have worked for them. you have the best of everything. but whe

what they are afraid of mostly is being encircled by india.istan and india which would basically put pakistan in the middle of a geo strategic sandwich. what they do is back the taliban in afghanistan as a force that will hopefully gain power in afghanistan and prevent any sort of indian influence from taking root in afghanistan. the problem with the pakistan has with the united states the military doesn't trust that the united states will be there for any reasonable length of time and that when the americans leave, the indians will move back in. so, the taliban is their hedge against indian encirclement. now, these drone attacks are going on on the border around the federally administered tribal areas, but there's been some evidence reported by our intelligence folks that the pakistan pakistanis, who are assisting the afghan taliban, are providing them sanctuary in border cities, are now moving them to safety. guest: we reported this. guest: into karachi to get them out of the gun sights of the predator missiles. it preserve the afghanistan a

. 40 percent of the active ingredients come from china and india. and in most places, from areas that have never been inspected. now, my amendment does not allow drugs to be imported into this country from china or india. i am talking about the ingredients in the pharmaceutical industry of choirs with which to make their drugs. we don't allow drugs to be imported from china or india, as a matter of this amendment. only fda approved drugs from fda inspected plants in canada, the european countries, japan, new zealand or australian. that's all. why? because they have an identical chain of custody to us. and that's the basis on which we determine how reimportation could work and could work safely. but i want to describe a recent scandal that illustrates the double standard that some want to apply to this question. and the scandal was about a drug called heparin. a blood thinner commonly used by dialysis patients. it was a link to last year to more than 62 deaths. heparin was ultimately pulled from the market, and according to baxter health care, which

[laughter] he does return from an extended trip from india. next week he leaves for another trip to china and south korea. the question is, the usa is a country of that tremendous deficit. why should canada remain attached to such a country whose military is is the main asset -- is its main asset? should we not align ourselves with europe? >> i disagree with parts of that question. we are linking ourselves to the united states not because of the military, it is much, much broader than that. 40% of our economy is tied to trade with the united states. we are in their in our own self- interest. i think that we should not be looking to see how we can diminish that relationship. going back to some of the things i have said earlier, the relative position of the other countries, i think we should be very cautious of what is going on in the so called brick countries and other countries just below the tab. we need to see how best we can improve our economic relationship we have underway right now. we have negotiations with europe on economic developmen

afghanistan, pakistan, and india specifically. i argued and certainly it has occurred many months ago that we need to have a national debate and discussion about this because i think that has been lacking because of our focus on what was the top priority for all of us as directed by president bush. so we are all learning as we go. >> i would like to follow-up as explaining this to this information. as i see it, and i know this is correct unless you disagree, that we have now 68,000 american troops on the ground. there's 3,623,182 troops, this 104,000, 241. there's roughly 94,000 afghan troops and we won't count the 93,000 afghan police. so we will leave that aside. that's 200,000 versus 22,000 taliban and 100 al qaeda. sallai concern is and this is why i interrupted, just to get your focus on this, it doesn't seem to me to be a question of the numbers of troops. it's hard to say 200,000 versus 22,000 is that different than 230,000. it's the mission. and i guess what i'm trying to probe here is how are we going to change the missio

that requires india and pakistan to work more closely together. we are determined to see what we could do to make that possible. i have both talked to prime minister singh and president zardari about the. and of course, if we can get a closer working relationship between india and paxton, even after the bombings, it would help greatly the campaign against the top and also al qaeda in pakistan. >> i've read in a response to my colleague, about the plight of the island. the speaker of the island told as i left the plane, thank you so much for coming and thinking about a pic please do not forget as. and that's the message i would like to get to my right, honorable fred as he goes to. >> i am long-term interest in the problems that are faced operatively by those island states where the possibility is that we could be dealing with climate change refugees and climate change in the not-too-distant future. and therefore, copenhagen is important because it can allow us to make a commitment to help immediately those island states that are facing needs among

he is charged th being a key plotter in the pakistani terrorist attack imumbai, india, lasyear. fomore on the story we go to: sebastian tella, national security correspondent for "e los angeles tis" and tribune newspars. hereviously covered international terrorism from euro. >> thank you, it's a pleure. >>ehrer: now, you entered a plea of not guiltyoday, right. >> yesthieghts tt's correct. >> lehrer:what exactly is he charged with doing. >> he'charged with acting as a scout dog an intensive recoaissance by the packing stink terrorist oup carrying out the tacks using a cover as a amican businessman. in mumi opens a front business there and is suting video taping the tarts that were ultitely hit by these commando teams at killed 1 70 people. he's accused in a llow up plot this year of doing the same nd of scouting in denma for what wod have been a plot to attack the newspar that published the characterrures of the prophe moaned somyears ago. he's accused of thatuccessful attack and follow up pt of the same nate. >> lehrer: gettinback to the specifics in a ment. who is this guy. he

india is also moving very aggressively forward, particularly in the solar bit. but all across -- when we look at the installation of renewables, europe is moving forward aggressively with wind and solar. they have set goals of 25% by 2025 of renewables installed. and i was in ireland meeting with the irish energy minister, who has set an internal goal of getting to almost 40%. so a lot of countries moving forward with renewables, and part of that intent is to try to get some of that manufacturing. we can take a leadership position in the united states on that if we move forward aggressively, and there's significant job creation that comes from both the installation and the development and manufacturing of those facilities. host: san fernando, california can, matthew is on the independents line for mr. filsinger. what's your question? caller: well, basically i do have a question on the renewable energy. i am seeking a way and information on how to get -- i have several ideas for renewable, green energy ideas, and i just need some information on basically, where w

was set up a way the international community can see whether major emerging economies like china, indiarazil, permitting voluntary greenhouse gas emissions cuts they say they are going to be. but he did not achieve the overall goal that many americans and europeans were looking for, which was a binding international agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions. host: and the reason why he could not that the binding agreement -- was it because he could not get enough international cooperation, or is it just that they did not want to hear what he was trying to say? guest: it was a combination of things. part of it was because the u.s. had not acted on his own -- on its own, he could not commit the u.s. as the number two greenhouse gas emissions -- the matter in the world, to cut emissions. in addition, he would face the problem that under the current way our climate treaty, the global climate treaty is structured, many major the bidders, including china and india, are not required to make greenhouse gas reductions. many countries in the industrialized world were saying they refuse to commit

i am not even talking about india.evitalize this by. their basic mistake was to not really understand the degree of this recession i was in chicago to give based beach last week. i talked to upper-middle-class people and i saipast, people who knew people lost their jobs and virtually every hand went up. it is an interesting recession because of its people who have never been unemployed before at the same time, it is people who thought they were richer than they were. these are people who call into cspan and otherwise. the type of stimulus he did which was a very interesting stimulus which was phased in over several years was not something that franklin roosevelt was done. it had to be the equivalent of the shuttle ready stimulus to get these people -- shovel-ready stimulus to get these people to feel that he cared about them. i think he will turn the next year into a big economic driver. he will also address the deficit budget. many people are worried about the size of the deficit host: newcastle, pa., good morning. yo

several thought with india the triggers a border war with china and the exclamation point of the chinese test of 1964 and with that the and dank community began to give serious thought parker it is a country with a lot of talented people but ghandi put the stamp of approval in 1967. the initial massive health in terms of technology and the first was me 1974. interesting thing about that test, first of all, we never saw it coming. was at the pentagon then we said the indians had done in nuclear test but the satellites showed nothing but that is because they dug the test told by hand. maybe they did not want it to be seen that for whatever reason they dug it by hand. and something most bureaucrats wedded meyer is the minister of defense or her foreign secretary or any other national operatives that she had a nuclear weapons program until four weeks before the first test. they inspired a few years after they decided to go. pakistan number eight. that is the scary part. it was a 1971 civil war in bangladesh that was off of the mainland and that civil war was assisted and the next impetus cam

i often am telling my indian friends, india, although after many decades in the past, but india stilldicated, that spirit, i think. i was telling my indian friends, what do you enjoy about independence? there is any progress there. good. but the country as a whole still has a lot of problems. a lot of poverty. there's still in need of that kind of spirit. so tom lantos was that kind of person. and personally, [unintelligible] from the hungry, and his life experience broad difficulty. but through his own hard work, the spirit is really great. he was a very successful person. and not only as an individual but also a tremendous amount of service to research and field. so what else i should say? i do not know. [laughter] you have seen this sort of metdal. it is quite heavy. [laughter] but this gives me some kind of encouragement of the sign of recognition of life and a little service. of those now, for the rest of my life, i take it with me. for promotional human value, promotional human affection and compassion and the quality and basic human rights forever in to that or in mainland chin

and finally, what programs have you found in other countries, especially in india? how serious is this problem? >> we talk about policy positions that discriminate against populations, that the terror our ability to identify -- that deter our ability to identify patients in care. all of these things that differentiate, that separate, that discriminate work against your ability to embrace and care for these and the individuals -- care for these individuals in a profound way. we do talk about that. india pose the incident is very low, but at the same time it competes with south africa and probably has more people infected than any of the country. the decentralization of health care in india as well as the state configurations of government have put the discussion in responding to the epidemic almost as a separate discussion for each state. but india has engaged in an effective strategy for prevention especially, and has moved well along the road to educating their physicians and especially the nurse populations and the private sector to create a cadre of health care w

payne of new jersey regarding india. secretary clinton, if you have time, have we consulted with the indians in terms of their relationship with pakistan in reducing the concern that the pakistanis have relative to india? >> yes. >> the time of the gentleman expired. yes/no questions are very good for the last seven seconds. the gentleman from florida, mr. mack is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and i want to thank our witnesses for being here today, and for your service to our country. i agree with many of the president's points in his speech. i, too, believe with every fiber of my being that we as americans can still come together behind a common purpose. nonetheless, i disagree with the president's decision to personally relay to our enemies when they can regroup and when they can retake afghan territory. i simply cannot understand and cannot agree with this approach. for president obama to indicate he has already made a decision that will take effect in 18 months, irrespective of what the situ

with regard to the london conference, will the prime minister undertake to invite russia, china and india to take part? willie except that this is not only appropriate is they face -- will he accept that this is not only appropriate as they faced the same terrorist threats, but their presence would reassure unlike iraq, our presence in afghanistan has the unanimous support of united nations security council? >> mr. speaker, the former foreign secretary is a blip -- absolutely right, that any sentiment that will insure not interference by other members -- it will have to include members of the countries mentioned. they to be part of better security arrangements for afghanistan. as far as specific details of the london conference, i hope we will be able to announce more information. says, that there have to be talks with the countries in the region about how they can secure the future of afghanistan and build the economic, cultural, and cultural links -- social links that are necessary if afghanistan is to control its own affairs. this morning -- this summer, i was able to see the very exce

did occur was that at a poinwhere there was about to be complete eakdown and the prime minister of india heading to the airport, anthe chinese representatives were essentlly skipping negotiations ,is and everybody was screaming , what did happen was coolereads preveiled, and we wereably to at least age on non-lelly binding panthers for all countrs, not just the united states not just uraniu but also for chi and india which, projecting forwd are, the going to be the world's largest emiters. that w an important principle that everybody has to do something in order to soe this problem. but i make no claimsnd didn't make anylaims going in that somehow at was going to be everythi that we needed to do to solve climate change. and my main responsibilityere is to convin the american people at it is smart economics and it igoing to be the enginef our economic grow for us to be a leader in clean energy. and if we pass a bill the senate, concile it with the use that says we are going t investn wend energy, and solar energy and we're going to behe guys producingend turbine and we are going to the fo

we don't think of the fact what transformed china transformed india, transform latin america, easterneurope and asia that created a stable prosperous democracies was the middle class in those countries that were dependent on private sectors that were integrated into the global economy. and we don't think that in the muslim world are not going to get them to where brazil, argentina, tie one worker leah ar unless the same class that got the countries where they are also becomes in power in the muslim world. so we are looking for the solution in the muslim world without looking at what is the force supposed to produce the solution. and i think the change agent in the muslim world ultimately will have to come from the middle class from the

in india todaymourners chanted in a semn funeral procsion. ey said the dear departed was no cherishedommunity leader b planet earth. >>he world leaders have fill the planet. now it's up to people come together because we ed a deal that is real. >> suarez:hat deal, of courseis the 12-paragraph non-bindg copenhagen accord annound after two weeks of grueling negotiations and la- minute dealing 193 participt nations formally called for billns inid to help poor nations cope with clime change but set no firm targets fo cutting greenhouse gas emissions. the u.n.'s cmate chief:. >> an pressive accord but not an accord thats legally bindg. not anccord that at this moment pins down instrialized countries to dividual targets. >> suarez: at art, the accord represent just how far president obama and e leaders of cna, brazil, india and south africa we willing too at a snowed-i white house saturday afteris return, the prident had a more upbeat assessment. >> for the firstime in histy all of the major... the world's major econies have come together to accept

prescription drugs come from india and china. think of that. 40% of the active ingredients of all the prescription drugs consumed in our country comes from india or china. and i described earlier today a "wall street journal" investigatory report which shows the circumstances with the active ingredient for heparin, the production of heparin in a -- in a building in china. this, by the way, shows the development of pig intestines for the production of heparin. you will see -- "wall street journal" articles, in the expose, here is a man in this building in china that is producing heparin that is stirring a rusty old pot with what appears to be a twig from a tree. in clearly unsanitary conditions. and that becomes ingredients for america's prescription drug supply, 40% of our active ingredients come from circumstances in which there is virtually no inspection or very few inspections of those kind of places where those prescription drugs are developed. and by the way, there was a drug that was produced by a pharmaceutical company, a

we don't allow drugs to be imported from china or india as a matter of this amendment. only fda approved drugs from fda inspected plants in canada, the european countries japan, new zealand, or australia. that's all. why? because they have an identical chain of custody to us. and that's the basis on which we determine how reimportation could work and could work safely. but i want to describe a recent scandal that illustrates the double standard that some want to apply to this question. in the scandal was about a drug called heparin, a blood thinner commonly used by dialysis patients was linked laster to more than 62.. heparin was pulled from the market and according to baxter health care which market separate than the u.s. the allergic reactions to heparin that caused those deaths appear to be caused by a contaminant that was added in the place of the active ingredient in pepper and somewhere during the manufacturing process, most likely in china. "the wall street journal" did a really important story on the heparin contamination. they reported that more than half of th

brazil's lula, one from india along with wen and president obama. those meetings kept on through the evening. and finally resulted in an agreement just before midnight denmark time. >> reporter: all week, ray, we've talked about the big issues, targets, financing, verification. so what's in this this agreement -- agreement? >> suarez: the most generous thing you can say about it is that it puts off some of the hardest negotiating down into the future. the most near-end target are left blank, left undefined while further outdates, 2050, for instance, when the big industrial economies commit to an 80% reduction in their greenhouse emissions is specifically defined. there is no architecture set up though there are general principless laid out for the cash transfer to the least developed economies. this is a deal that doesn't meet a lot of the targets that many of the countries that came here to negotiate said were their bottom line so there's bound to be grumbling after what's to you being called the copenhagen accord starts to -- starts to disseminate

soa, india, brazilmade substantial commitmentto redu their emissions. not as much as we ed.and e u.s. --. >> woouff: you think that was alrey happening. >> wl, it was happening on the way in. a lot of these commitments we made a few weeks ago. and the presidenmade his announment of the 17% cut which you know fits that category of a prome but noyet a road map to do it. the next thing that the presidencan do is use power he's already gotrom the clean air t and other existing laws to dramatically cut our emisons. and he staed doing that in may when hannounced that there wille a 30% cut from cars. >> woodruff: samuel wh abouthe facts that these chges were being made by a number of cotries, the ry fact that this conference was held anwas comi caused some of these changes to be made. does that present progress >> i think that represents ve modest progress. i would disagreeith dan, for instance, when he characterizes e chinese commitment leading up to copenhagen significant. it's little hard to know what the chineseommitment was, theay they made it warather vague but i think most a

discussions, the economy the global world and business impact that america and india can have on eache are not talking about that. i have a feeling the next time that there is a state dinner, when we get -- when they get together with the delegation ahead of time, month or would, instead of just going over food allergies or possible impairments that need to be addressed they are probably going to ask desiree rogers, how are you handling your list? that happens. that happens. that's why having a point of contact is really helpful to get people through. >> larry: when i come back i will ask joe petro if he thinks this could happen again. don't go away. that separates a man from his freedom. because freedom always finds a path... to build peace. this film is dedicated to aung san suu kyi, still prisoner in burma. let's fine-tune your business to take advantage of new opportunities. (music volume decreases) well, ups can help lower warehouse costs, (music volume increases) while increasing your global reach. (volume increases, decreases) more ups technology can help bring down paperwork.

, the economy the global world and business impact that america and india can have on each other, we are not talking about that. i have a feeling that the next time that there is a state dinner, when we get -- when they get together with the delegation ahead of time, month or would, instead of just going over food allergies or possible impairments that need to be addressed they are probably going to ask desiree rogers, how are you handling your list? that happens. that happens. that's why having a point of contact is really helpful to get people through. >> larry: when i come back i will ask joe if he thinks this could happen again. don't go away. he refinery in the south. i'll never forget. it used one tank of petrol and i had to refill it twice with oil. a new car today has 95% lower emissions than in 1970. exxonmobil is working to improve cars, liners of tires, plastics which are lighter and advanced hydrogen technologies that could increase fuel efficiency by up to 80%. well, say you're looking for it in new places, like working with a supplier in china and a manufacturer in germ

as ways to destabilize pakistan and invoke and inflict problems within india. >> if the opposite were true, if we were to either fail in this offensive mission against the taliban and al-qaeda in afghanistan or not embark on it, what would be impact be on the stability of the pakistani government in your opinion. >> let me just ask admiral mullen, we've seen what happens when the pakistanis made deals with the tribes of various groups on the western -- on the northwestern frontier, it created a sanctuary and safe haven in which taliban which had been knocked back on its heels and nearly destroyed in 2001, 2002 had the space in which it could reconstitute itself to the point where it could become a major problem for the united states and a number of other allies. if given the same kind of space in eastern afghanistan and southern afghanistan the ttp and pakistan could use it to strengthen itself and expand its ranks and be even more effective in its efforts to destabilize the government. >> i've spent a lot of time in pakistan and each time i go, i learn how much i still to have learn.

guest: he is actually the most popular columnist in the india recently. -- in india recently. he takes forward-looking the ideas, talks to people are around the world and is able to package them in a way that speaks to a broad columnist. host: how did you discover that he was the most popular in india? guest: i think i read it in a newspaper. host: is that because he is so popular, or because there are so many people reading his column? next phone call. caller: good morning. bill kristol, and there are sort of like mad scientists, they had never met a muslim they would not want to bomb. and did sarah palin make the list? guest: she did not. we saw the extent of her global fought in the campaign. i will leave it there. host: next phone call. caller: i believe barack obama is not a marxist. he is a good thinker, tries to plan things out. our country is about pulling together and trying to make things work, no matter your politics. i think if everyone knew what the rich things of america, they think nothing of view. i have worked for them. you have the best of everything. but whe

finally, what kinds of programs to you have, especially in india? >> we talk about policy positions that discriminate against populations. that to turn our ability to identify and retain patience and care. all those types of issues that differentiate and separate, that discriminate work against your ability to identify and embrace and care for these individuals. -- in a very profound way. so we do talk about that. india's incidents is very low, but it at the same time it competes with south africa but is probably has more -- has more people infected than any other country. the decentralization of health care in india as well as the state configurations of government have put the discussion and responding to the epidemic almost as a separate discussion for each state. india has engaged in an effective strategy for prevention and has moved well along the road to educating their positions and especially their nurse population and the private sector to create a cadre of health care worker, with backup from physicians and nurses, that is effectively iden

india and china have a constant problem. pakistan and india have their famous problems. and we have the durham line. and it is a very, very serious issue. but it is not one i think we can fix in the middle of a war. so i hear you. i understand the importance of it, but we're not going to put that on the front burner right now. >> i'm going to ask a last question. it's not my question. it's a question sent in by a national member who have been participating through video means. and it is from jonathan paris, south asia center of the atlantic council, london in the. and it is about pakistan, about the effect of our policy in pakistan. given that the obama administration several times during the last two months has said pakistan is a party that are you concerned that the mayor can pressure around the pakistani army to go after the afghan taliban inside baluchistan will ultimately undermine the cohesion of the pakistani army with and contribute to the destabilization of pakistan? is that sort of concern? >> i don't think any american official ever said quote pakistan is the

after that, not before, after that, to the arab-israeli conflict and some of the issues pertaining to india and pakistan and that's how they are focused at that time. with regard to iraq, one would be surprised that they speak about iraq less at these summits than one might imagine. or expect. or believe. and a reason has to do -- going back to 1976 and their memories of iraq's view towards all six of these countries, their forms of government. their lesser degree of development. their lacking in agricultural sector, their lacking in industrial sector and their lacking the driving force of the baath party, they are not having thought in a war like iraq did in iran and suffered as many casualties. so this suspicion about iraq's ultimate intentions not just towards kuwait but all the others there is one suspect with it and the same with regard to iran. but it also has to do with march, 1975 and if i had to say one single agreement that is the strategic glue of all six of them it's the algiers accord of march, 1975. now, this took place in the ecos and the wakes and the shadows of person and i

so, india is a very important player and india carries a good bit of - not very helpful ideological baggageize the more responsibility of developing countries but even there in response to movements elsewhere in the world, there's been some change of focus recently so i'm hopeful that in india too will play a positive role. among the developed countries we'll have been waiting for the u.s.. well not waiting for the u.s. commitments have been made but everybody has been recognizing the u.s. is the big, big piece of the jigsaw sitting in the middle without which things can't coming to. and if it looks as if the president's position is going to be supported by the congress, although that u.s. position is much weaker than any other developed country, the u.s. at least legislating what will amount to an important change intra jek try will have a very positive outcome. >> well i think we're out of time. i want to thank all the panelists and the questions on the floor. one final remark because it's a subject near and dear to my heart and that is, as we move towards copenhagen and look at those tha

india at a rate of 8%. the united states, from 30 million at about 34%. these nations are growing in an extremely ecologically destructive fashion, and also in a way that, we're talking about the pollution of aquifers. talking about the death of the oceans. we're talking about farmland turning into desert. were talking about the world population increasing by 50% in the next 40 years. and i don't want to believe this, but the evidence and the judgment of scientists who look at this see that the overall systemic problem of over stewed and collapse at the global level is a potential catastrophe that needs to be addressed and will not be solved by a blasÉ fair capitalist. >> i think there's something to be said to that argument. if we talk about the ecological system it seems to me to be one of the obvious examples of how we focus on just one issue, biofuels discussion where we basically say let's have more biofuels. there's a huge reason why biofuels has gone online. there are a lot of farmers that have seen opportunities because there is exercised the. but

they went through all the checks and there was no danger to the president or the prime minister of indiaif there is no danger, why did you do background checks? >> that's a fundamental question because casual visitors to the white house christmas tree are subjected to background checks and you just said here that it didn't matter really that you did do the background checks because they had been vetted as only points in the was no danger. was there a danger of not to the president and if there isn't because you have all those different points tuesday they don't have a gun in these things, why do you read every visitor to see the white house christmas tree? >> doing background checks are one level of our security and just because we do a background check on somebody that comes back and have no record it to me that doesn't mean there's no danger. >> but my question is you said there was no danger to the president because they went through all these things to show that they basically didn't pose a threat. is that correct? was there a threat or not to the president? >> we have countermeasure

the principal engagement has to be from pakistan and india.from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. democratic line. caller: your comments fly in the face of myÑi brother, a 34 year veteran of the navy seals. he was very point-blank about the level of corruption. not just in afghanistan, but pakistan, who created the taliban in the first place. it is a construct of the pakistani government and they have no intention of doing away with the taliban. for you and president obama, who i supported, to waste -- meet the treasury of our country continually, i echo what my friend in boston just said. we are becoming a bankrupt nation to act as a guarantor for the middle east. they are not our allies. you are not our allies. you will never be our allies. it is a fabricated lie. host: i have to jump in, we are almost out of time. guest: first of all, corruption is an issue wherever it is. a concern of the united states and it will be addressed in terms of our engagement. we will take every step, from talking to leaders to taking every step to do away with corrupti