mrs. thatcher in her 1982 objection to effectively nationalizing the world's oceans through a new multinational but rockacy outweigh the advantages and make the treaty inbalance and a net loss for u.s. interest. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. secretary. i appreciate it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. members of the committee for this opportunity to appear before this committee to discuss the law of the sea convention. let e let me say at the out set and as unequivocally as possible i believe the united states should exceed to this treaty as you have heard recently from the secretaries of state and defense the chairman of the jcs and our maritime service chiefs, there real costs to remaining outside the treaty. for the benefit of our country i hope this is the year that we finally become party to the law of the sea. my involvement with this treaty dates back to 1970 when i was a member of the national security council staff. i was given the assignment of helping coordinate the preparation of president nixon's first directive on the law of the sea. i have worked on this issue on and off in

mr. thatcher is one of our most devoted readers. he knows what's wrong with every copy since i took over. read the cable. >> girls, delightful in cuba, stop. could send you prose, poems about scenery but don't feel right about stealing your money. there is no war in cuba. >> you provide the prose poems, i'll provide the war. >> that's good mr. kane. >> yeah, i rather like it myself. >> frederick remington is a name that wasn't in that movie. how does he fit into this? >> he was the artist whom william randolph hearst sent to cuba to illustrate and draw sketches of the cuban rebellion that had swept the island by 1897. remington travels there in the company of richard harding davis, who was becoming the best known, most eminent foreign correspondent, work correspondent in the united states. this is a real coup for hearst to send these two individuals to cuba. and supposedly remington found that everything was quiet in cuba, there was not going to be a war with the united states. he sent a cable asking hearst to -- if it would be okay

mrs. thatcher that came from the right-of-center press. in her turn, i think she admired the businessmen who were prepared to take risks. so i think it was that meshing of those particular aspects that produced the strong level of support for her. and when i say i didn't want inherit it -- i didn'tic -- i didn't inherit it, plainly, it was different. >> thank you. and you make it clear, sir john, in paragraph 5 that you did not, um, engage closely with the maxwell press, center-left titles and didn't seek a close relationship with any part of the media, and you describe that as quixotic. what do you mean precisely by that? i mean, we know what the term means, but what did you mean by that? >> yes. well, of course, a natural symmetry between the press and politicians. the politicians, all of them -- myself included -- would like to have a supportive press. the press have a quite different objective. they need stories. and they wish to sell their newspapers. so it was quixotic not for me to be close to the press. i wasn't able to seek to inf

mrs. thatcher. they were common attitudes to business. i think there is a similar attitude towards the european union, not exactly the same because the parity that one often gets in mrs. thatcher's relationship with the european union is far from reality when actually saw at the time. and of course she became pretty iconic act her the falcons. and i think there's enough information to produce the very high level of admiration for mrs. thatcher. in our term back in the early business better prepared to take risks and suddenly prior to the proprietors of newspapers. it was the gnashing of those particular aspects that produced the strong level of support. and when i say i can inherit it, and i haven't been prime minister. and the trade legislation plainly was different. >> thank you. >> he made it clear in paragraph paragraph 5 that she did not engage closely with the mac's low price with less titles and didn't see the close relationship with any part of the media. he described that. what you mean pre

mrs. thatcher was croat -- quoted by secretary rumsfeld. if question is is there internationalization of the sea. it suggested maybe somebody might stretch this one bay to the atmosphere. on the other hand, they question we have to resolve is brought up and people mentioned lockheed martin. i received a letter that maybe other members of the committee have the i quote this part. it says the multibillion dollar investments needed to establish an ocean based resource development business must be predicated on clear legal rights established and protected under the treaty base framework of law of the sea convention including international seabed authority. on the one hand you can take the position that the ocean out there, whether it's close to our shorelines or 200 miles or not, is nobody's business. in essence, there is no idea of internationalization. nobody owns it. just a question of whether you want to go out and drill or not. take your chances. what mr. stephens is saying as a practical matter in terms of american businesses, very few of

mrs. thatcher and the conservative party in all those 18 years. you know, they did, frankly, and do represent a certain strain of support that labor might have that hadn't had throughout the '80s and early '90s. so, you know, even if the situation had not been as i describe, if i had been given the chance to go and persuade them to come over to labor, i would have taken that. so that's why i think it's just important that we try and calibrate this very carefully. otherwise i think we will get into a situation that's a bit unrealistic. >> do you accept that you may have contributed to the mystique, if i can put it in that way, by at the time not publicizing each meeting with mr. murdoch or, 3 by, inviting him through the back door? >> i don't think we publicized any meetings with the media people actually. the reason having not just him but certain people who you then spend days trying to explain what you were talking about, is simply that you would spend days explaining what you were talking about. i think in future it's probably better you publis

mrs. thatcher's radical approach andc;3 it was causing too much social divide so she wasn't a thatcheritethat was the one period when we sensed the queen was not really in sync with her prime minister, would you agree? >> i do agree but there'swh: another dimension to this and we scnt a conversation of britain without reminding everyone that class is the sole obsession of british life and the queen is part of the upper class, the tough class. and that's been true ever since they stopped being part of an international cosmopolitan royal elite and started to call themselves windsor which was during the first world war. and they started to marry members of the british aristocracy. now they're part of the aristocracy. they're just the top aristocrats at least that's how they think of themselves. some aristocrats look down on the royal family. >> the spencers. >> absolutely they do. >> rose: this is the family of diana. >> and so he fits effortlessly to her social circle. the prime ministers she's had trouble with are the ones who've been pushy grammar schoolboys obviously middle-class and wi

mrs. thatcher. i think there was a similar attitude towards the european union, not exactly the same, because the parity that one often gets with mrs. thatcher's relationship with the european union was much closer than saw at the time. and of course she became pretty iconic, and i think it was the culmination of those that produce the very high level of admiration and support for mrs. thatcher that came from the right of center press. from her term, i think she admired businessman who were prepared to take risks, and that applied to proprietary of newspapers. i think it was the meshing of those particular aspects that produced strong level of support. when i say inherited, i mean i have not been prime minister. i have not introduce treating and legislation cleanly. it was different. -- trading and legislation clearly. >> you say in paragraph 5 of that you did not engage with the center-left and engage in any relationship with the media. what do you mean by that? we know what that term means, but wh

mrs. thatcher in 1982, she promptly grasped the issues at stake. her conclusion on the treaty was unforgettable. she said, "what this treaty proposes is nothing less than the international nationalization of roughly 2/3 of the earth's service." referring to her battles dismantling the putin state- owned mining and utility companies, she said, "you know how i feel about nationalization." the major idea underlying the law of the sea treaty is that the richness of the ocean, beyond national boundaries, is the common heritage of mankind, this supposedly owned by all people. actually, this means they are unowned. this idea of ownership, encompassed in the treaty, requires that anyone who finds a way to make a use of such riches by applying their labor or technology or there is taking -- their risk-taking, are required to pay royalties of unknown amounts -- potentially billions, possibly tens of billions -- over an extended period, and ill-defined period of time. to the new international seabed authority for distribution, to less developed countries. thi

day before the berlin wall speech, margaret thatcher was elected to a third term at the prime minister of the uk, great britain. reagan gives this speech. mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. all of a sudden there was electricity. it was the western alliance. we were all on the march, and the people, as symbolized by that young girl in east berlin, said there is hope. in peter robinson's video, it's going to visit those people who said, no, we'll never get accustomed to the wall. it must come down, and to have the words of the president of the united states who we referred to always as the leader of the free world come to that wall, and you saw in the video clip the bulletproof glass behind him because our secret service wasn't sure that there would be a sniper from the east berlin. these were tense moments in the course of history, and to be that strong but do it in a way of hope and optimism. if you truly want to liberalize, if you mean what you say, here's visible evidence. go do it. and the people of germany did it, and gorbachev did it, too. >> well, ken, i don't want to dominate the conversation because we have a wonderful audience he

thatcher? if we can, we can turn this u.s. economy around, and the economy and yobs jobs is the issue of this presidential campaign season. mrpresident, let me ask somebody if they can shake their head, is there anybody else waiting to get the floor? because i'd like to take another three minutes i if i could on another issue. mr. president, skilled that my remarks that i'm going to make now be placed in the record when we -- where we do the debate on the f.d.a. bill. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: mr. president, two years ago a constituent of mine named david rosga committed suicide shortly after smoking a product called k-24, a synthetic form of marijuana. a week before he passed away, david had graduated from indinal high school. he was looking forward to attending university of northern iowa that fall. david and his friends spent the week after graduation going to parties and celebrating their achievements. some of david's friends heard about k-2 from some other trends who were home from college. these friends were told that if you smoked this product like marijuana, you could get high. david and