>> i think it's fair to say this is a very dramatic situation going on in iran and by all indications of the authorities are very much focused on this dramatic internal situation. >> so what are you saying, they won't do anything on the nukes? >> i'm not saying that out all. it just at the present time the world is watching and all eyes are on the internal situation. >> is the u.s. still willing to have the p-5+1 meeting despite what's going on in iran? >> p-5+1 at the g8? i think it's up to the italian hosts. i think you have to ask them. >> but the u.s. -- >> we have said if they would respond to of invitation that we would take it up. >> one more on the iran. you were sitting watching with great interest can you be more specific help the secretary is watching this because a lot of the dramatic stuff is real-time coming over to the tv reporting on a twitter etc. and also there is this case of the young woman that died. is the secretary aware of that? is she making any comments about the role of women in this which is significant? >> while i think that as i said before, dennis ross i

this legislation implements sanctions on those who supply refined fuels to iran. and this legislation expands sanctions on iranian exported petroleum -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. the gentleman from indiana deserves to be heard. the house will be in order. the gentleman from indiana. mr. burton: mr. speaker, this legislation expands sanctions on iranian exported petroleum and petroleum byproducts as well as those who help facilitate its export. iran can only threaten us and the world because of the foreign investment in its energy sector. depriving the regime of petroleum and foreign investment will severely undermine iran's economy and increase pressure on them to abandon their dangerous course. we need to impose serious sanctions on iran and need to do it without delay. we have been delaying long enough. the bill has been introduced for some time. i talked to the chairman of the committee about it and there's no reason not to move on it today. the chair: the gentleman yield back? mr. burton: i yield back. the

process, and they're diluted and delayed by russia and china that they don't really come to bear on iran. and, i mean, short of war i think sanctions would be the only hope of persuading the regime that its hold on power will be even shorter if it continues although the closer they get to a nuclear weapon, and they could be, you know, as close as a year now, the time is rapidly running out on that. so i'm not optimistic that they are going to be convinced by these pressures. >> [inaudible] >> stuart, reuters. a general question for the panel. the president of iran is sometimes portrayed as somewhat of a us nut case with holocaust denial, with direct threatening of israel, and with general comments that seem off the charts. do we think he's really that, or do we think he's a good poker player with some very good bluffs going on? >> ken, do you want to -- >> well, you know, there's some people who are, you know, maybe treated for psychological problems can be brilliant in games in some ways too. i don't think it's an either/or situation. i do think, however, that he has attracted the wrath

he was open to talks with iran without pre- condition. ruth on the republican line, which you make of the president's approach? caller: this last ellis of the same thing i wanted to sue. obama should just back off of iran and let them be. just let them do their own thing. the same thing in afghanistan and in the other countries. he wants to send money to build the mill. the money he wants to send over there we need over here. -- to bail them out. he always wants to give people money, give people money, but he doesn't for over here. our health program, they have synergy, and a first person who signs up on that there's a $6 charge. if they go up to $10 apiece if they add more people into the family they pay for all the medical. the prescriptions are all paid for and you do not have to worry if you have somebody who has cancer right now. anything now there will be covered under that insurance. there will not be charged any more for it. there is nowhere as you can buy insurance that will be that cheap. it is synergy with the company and the phone num

we are focused on what is going on inside iran. >> how focused is the u.s. government on the growing schism among the members of the theocracy in sight of iran? >> i think we are monitoring all of the situation's very closely. -- all of these situations are very closely. we are monitoring how the people are being treated by their government. we are monitoring how the situation is unfolding and i will leave it at that. >> you said that you needed to approach-to coordinate approaches with allies. how exactly are you coordinating these? >> the secretary has called some of her colleagues today. we are going to have more opportunities to talk in these multilateral meetings coming up. as far is a joint statements are concerned, we are talking more about common approaches than joint statements. >> are there any more talks with the former iranian crown prince >> and now remarks on by the former iranian crown prince. he talks about the current political unrest in his native country and the 1979 islamic res -- revolution. from the national press club, this is an hour.

>> yes. >> one more on iran? i will run out of material. >> we will supply the material. >> do you think it is appropriate to have the people -- the iranians coming on july 4. is there thought of taking back the invitation? >> no. >> it is important to have a social dialog? >> we have decided to engage with iran on a number of fronts and we tried many years of isolation and we are after a different path. >> the president keeps saying -- that it is important for the u.s. not to be seen trying to influence iran. but the government is blaming the united states and the british for meddling or making social networking available. by simply saying that they stand with the people. this morning, we heard from the press, essentially asking obama and the state department to say more about this. if this -- is this going to be the pathway? >> what you can see, they are using this as a foil, the great satan, to justify policies and gain public support. we do not want to get into this necessarily, but what you saw over the weeke

we are focused on what is going on inside iran. the, how focus is the government on what appears to be the growing schism among people -- members of the theocracy in iran? >> we are monitoring all of these situations closely. we are monitoring how the iranian people are being treated by their own government, we are monitoring the way the situation is unfolding. i will leave it at that. >> usage needed to coordinate approaches with allies. we have not seen any joint statements or any high level meetings on the matter. how are you coordinating with allies? >> the secretary has called some of her colleagues today. we will have more opportunities to talk on these meetings coming up. as far as joint statements are concerned, i think we are talking more about, approaches then a joint statements. >> now to the national press club for marks by iran's former crown prince. today he discuss the political unrest in his native country and what people are telling him. it is a little over one hour. and then othem a good morning, d gentleman. thank

see the need to get a whole lot more specific about than the fact it's a continuing struggle. >> on iran last week the white house was trying to send a message out there's no pressure at all from what's going on on capitol hill, no external pressure, to respond in a more forceful way. but i notice that statement over the weekend seemed tougher than the usual language from the white house. can you say that the white house feels no pressure at all to change its current policy in terms of how it is responding? >> is he correct, though? there's a perception that the president has ratcheted up -- you said his statements have been crystal clear and consistent but there's a perception among pundits and others, whomever, that there's a perception -- >> far be it from me to conduct that foreign policy based on pundits we see on television. where has that gotten us. [laughter] >> wait, we're asking the questions here! [laughter] >> i think i'm answering them fairly well today. sure, why not. i'm a pundit, i'm doing great. let me tell you, let me -- i think -- i knew the answer almost before you as

speakers discuss the current political situation in iran and will make recommendations on how to stop iran's nuclear weapons program. live coverage now from the heritage foundation in washington, d.c.. >> nobody exactly guessed when the soviets tested, the americans were off by several years, so it immediately happens in the wake of this surprise whether it's the april surprise or the october surprise, whatever, is countries immediately scurry to figure out how are we going to deal with this even though they knew inside that someday this was coming. what happens if we all just wake up one morning on cnn, and they announce that they believe iran has tested a nuclear device whether for peaceful purposes or not? and so the question is immediately people ask themselves, what should we do next? so that's the question that we put to our research team is what do we do the day after? and so to discuss that we have three panel cysts, and first -- panelists, and first will be ken katzman. he's a senior analyst for the research service, and he's not speaking for crs or any member or committee of

one thing to understand is israel can't take on iran on its own. it can't threaten iraq. so if nuclear prospects in iran are israel's greatest threat, there needs to be cooperation with the united states. that is why today he will try to get with both the officials. heeds telling -- he's telling people at home we can't do everything we want because of the global position. and telling americans, i can't do everything you want me to do because these are the people that voted for me his presidency we have florida on the line. go ahead, please. caller: one of the keys is to create a two-state solution. it seems two problems are inherent with that. one is this the palestinians are extremely divided. you have hamas and gaza. and in the west bank, you have a division between the plo and fascia who are rivalling one anothers. one of the significant challenges is how do the palestinians come together as a unity. the second issue is whenever the palestinians have been offered an opportunity for a two-state solution at camp david and most recently with negotiations with omar where re

on the topic here. caller: well, the topic is iran. aren't we having the same problems in america with things passing that the american people don't want? host: let's move on to brunswick, georgia. mitch on the line for democrats. >> caller: yes, good morning. host: good morning. caller: i wondered why the ayatollah and other clerics initially went after the u.k. before, you know, as far as the rhetoric towards the u.s., why was that? guest: that is a mixture of historical and contemporary reasons. the historical ones is that britain has been involved in iran. sometimes we did the wrong thing, including assisting in the replacement of an iranian government as recently as 1953. iranians have long memories and they haven't forgiven us for that. there are also contemporary reasons, and that is to do with the fact that the brittish media are strong, objective and balanced so naturally they have carried voices out of iran to the international community, and then put those voices back into iran, which the authorities in iran find objectionabl

they were quick to bump -- jump on the situation. iran threw a monkey wrench in the plans, they should have had a fair election. host: this is from "the washington times." the world reacts cautiously to the ahmadinejad election. "it world weary of iran's nuclear program reacted cautiously saturday to hard-line leader mahmoud ahmadinejad's hotly disputed re-election. some expressed hope that the islamic republic's president will soften his defiance and warm cheap recent u.s. overtures. for the volatile middle east and the west alike, the stakes are high. allies fear that iran is trying to build an atomic weapon." barbara, texas, republican line. you are on "washington journal." caller: i think that this has put the united states in a tough position, but i think that obama has put the united states in a disastrous position. if you are going to be a paper tiger like president obama, that is why north korea is stretching its muscles now. god only knows what iran is going to do now that we have president obama in office. at least president bus

our guest will focus on iran. he will be jack goldstone of george mason university at about 745 a.m. eastern. in the meantime we will get an update on iran now joining us by phone from to buy. -- from dubai. is the middle east correspondent for the los angeles time. when did yoyou last leave iran? guest: friday morning. the situation in iran is extremely tense right now. it appears the protests have died down. there was a series of mass protests as well as sporadic rioting, clashes in the streets among security forces and demonstrators as well as the sydney-official pro-government militias. -- semi-official pro-hamas militias. there is a sweeping crackdown. supporters of the mousavi . there are many people being harassed. many people have heard the news. yes debate eight staffers of the british embassy, local iranian staffers have been arrested and presumably some continue to be jailed on charges or accusations that they were fomenting this recent unrest. host: it says the government is deeply concerned about the

dialogue with iran was dead on arrival. tackling a similar op-ed in "the new york times." taken in sum, this opposition, this suggest that arab states reject an either or approach toward iran. the best course of action for many can be described as a sort of managed bases of confrontation and coexistence, no peace, no war. why, because this is how they benefited for so long and relegates domestic concerns to the back burner. and i think this raises my third point which is the opportunity cost in terms of u.s. policy interest in pursuing a competitive balancing paradigm against iran and pursuing a containment approach. there are a number of factors that may work against a radical shift in our policy toward iran, not least of which are the domestic politics inside the islamic republic. but a reversion to a pure containment paradigm carries a number of risks to u.s. policy interest, namely the neglect of domestic reform and possible increase tension resulting from an arab i run in cold war. the sidelining of the u.s. democratization and reform agenda is a trade off it became ap

that's booktv.org. >> a discussion now on iran, general motors, health care and other political news with syndicated columnist george will. he was a guest on "washington journal" for about an hour. >> on this thursday morning we are pleased to welcome columnist, george will. >> glad to be here. >> there is so much and i talk about your column, on sundays and thursday, and the topic today is tobacco. and why did you choose it and what is your point? >> i have written it over the years, because we're trying to deal with a product that's legal and deadly if used as to be used. it's curious, we are regulating so it raises all kinds of problems. it seems to me one of the great successes of government in the last 50 years is the fact that 50 years ago, half of all american population woke up in the morning and lit a cigarette. today, 25% smoke. that's tremendous good thing. arguably the most efficient thing government does in this middle class information acquiring country is regulate public health benefits. but what got my attention was the congress passes this bill empowering the federal

his comments and he has been very clear on this. >> ever since the president toughened his language on iran and today is a note to things have happened, and least two and one is it has all been but crushed so is the powerless to affect the situation they're in second, ahmadinejad has attempted to use his words as of seven the kind of oil and political football the president wanted to avoid so is the president parlous there and never to come and did he give them the kind of ammunition he was trying to avoid? >> no, interesting. interesting one a on your question from earlier in the week. >> i have changed. >> apparently. look, the international community continues to condemn what is going on in iran. i think if you ask the iranian regime where they are right now and where they sit in with a they think in control the country in a moment of honesty will get a farda in answer. the president again has done, has responded forcefully from the very moment of the elections. the first day that you all asked him questions in the oval office about violence that might happen and violence but at that poi

iran. it is not a b gene that is going to be easy to deal with. host: james from georgia on the independent line. caller: do you think it will ever be possible to shift the balance of power in iran? guest: i do not think it will be possible to shift the balance through elections. the regime has shown that the only result you'll get from elections are the results the regime wants. i do think something like what happened in poland where it took six months of strikes around the nation to force the regime to negotiate, and then the polish regime agreed to have elections. those elections had surprising results that led to solidarity gradually taking control of the government. i do not think that will do it alone. perhaps a campaign strike could force the government to negotiate or create more ballot elections. i do not see that happening right away. that is probably months and possibly years away. host: what other protesters around the world might be watching this particular situation in iran? what other countries might you be looking at now? guest: i have seen statements on the

i hope there is no attack on iran. if you want a difference in iran, it has to come from inside the country. if you attack them, you will cement that regime in place for 100 years. it plays into the thought that martyrdom is the greatest cause and it will all band together. even now with the elections, the whole world says you have to do something and you would see an adverse reaction in iran. if you change, it has to come from inside the country. in terms of israel, it is a double standard. people point that out where i worked at the un all the time. the united states bush's heart and other countries and kind of ignores the nuclear weapons from israel. in the era of communism, israel was always seen as a ball worked -- as a bullwork in defending those interests. but there is a new sentiment being expressed much more publicly. it is creating too much turmoil, the source of too much turmoil. host: what do you make of the presence of hezbollah in the light of elections? guest: hezbollah, it is a political party. the reas

i made a slight comment that there was minimal attention on iran. everybody jumps to the microphone and said absolutely not because of the impact of what iran could do. that was, i would say, news to not only myself but other members. they indicated in a very important impact. what changes the discussion from my discussion is i would call the political discussion. i am focused on fort greeley, alaska. my view is that both iran and north korea are threats. it is an important discussion and arguing point, and that is probably one of the points i will bring it up during the debate or for the next couple of days when we go through authorization. host: on the independent like mcdaniel is calling from michigan. -- on the michigan line, daniel is calling from michigan. caller: hi there. this is my voting res. -- my voting record. i voted for reagan, bush, clinton, gore, kerry, obama. guest: you are definitely independent. caller: anyway, what do you think about obama and the republicans who say he was not strong on the situation in iran? guest: a lot of peo

of the statements iran feels it is on the in mitchell of and the justice level in terms of supporting so-called reg is resistance in lebanon and palestine. and various gcc summits, is it still does circulates is america attack by iran and iran one without firing a single bullet or shedding a single drop of blood. >> thank you, says there were a few questions we will have respond barrett wanted to questions after that. >> a couple of points. i definitely agree with most of what to said. i would suggest that whether it is the u.s. acting without israeli collusion or israel acting by anselm israel in the united states will be considered to be inclusion certainly by iran and i ron will try to promote the perception in the arab world so i'm not sure as far as perception is concerned and in deference between just israel attacking in the u.s. attacking if that were to come about. we should expect that when israel will be brought in one way or another. the second thing about the strait of hormuz, i think this acclaimed you're rig

iran? i think on the surface air bridge seems may suggest an alignment with similar u.s. concerns and from the u.s. perspective it can be argued one of the solar linings of the toppling of a saddam hussein and lebanon war has laid bare of iran's long standing by levels before and the region and spurred their stance toward greater activism against the iranian challenge and throughout that we found in rain by arab activists the half ounce to anticipate the challenge and i iran's regional rise especially in iraq. jardine alice told us you have to hand it to the iranians, they had a plan for iran the renovation and deserve the influence that they have. in light of this recognition is to come as no surprise the u.s. is trying to harness the activism through

there were several initiatives to increase sanctions on iran. my colleagues will address this more on the nuclear issue. the protests have given new impetus to some of these ideas that have been around for a few years. sectioning companies that sell gasoline to iran. if there is a major sanctions bill introduced by mr. berhrman is as he is still holding to the position that he will not push in now because obama's policy is to reach out to iran. but that bill is out there and might attract new support. there are other new ideas in region. getting other companies to stop selling -- tele-communications to iran. some other members are interested in looking at the connections with china, latin america, russia. but some other countries that have been some what steps is to -- somewhat skeptical about sanctioning iran -- looking at those countries. looking rather at going back and maybe advancing some of the sanctions ideas that have been around anyway. i will stop there. >> thanks very much. it is a pleasure to be back at heritage. and has been a couple

waiting to hear from you on what is next from iran, the first person is joe on the republican line. ssachusetts. caller: unfortunately i think this will be a massacre. there is no other option for the ruling elite in iran. this is a great opportunity for us to get hold of those nuclear weapons in iran. host: ted, democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i think that this is going to be a case of natural evolution. we do not know yet halthat the ayatollahs will not seize control in a hardline wave. if not this week, next week, maybe even next year, but people change in iran like i feel that would have changed in iraq. this is almost a statement of how mistaken our former president and defense secretary were when they undertook the war in iraq. ultimately, iran will go in a way that will be more humane. i hope that it not -- it does not take 20 years. host: this front page of "the new york times" photograph is from tehran. we have been monitoring video on youtube, some of it over the weekend. we are not absolutely certain of the dates. we will show you some of the p

new mexico, last call on the issue of the response to iran. this is chris. good morning. on a cut of the lady before the last digit of a cut, the lady before the last caller was absolutely correct. any direct support from the united states would strengthen the hard-liners from iran and the iranians know that and that is what is coming on

since we're on iran, i know niko pitny is here. i know that you and all across the internet we've been seeinging a lot of reports coming directly out of iran. i know that there may actually be questions from people in iran who are communicating through the internet. do you have a question? >> yeah, i did, but i wanted to use this opportunity to ask you a question directly from an iranian. we've solicited questions last night from people who were still courageous enough to be communicating online and one of them wanted to ask you this. under which conditions would you accept the election of ahmadinejad and if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal of what the demonstrators there are working toward? >> well, look, we didn't have international observers on the ground, we can't say definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country. what we know is that a sizable percentage of the iranian people themselves spanning iranian society consider this election il

about iran because there's a new administration in washington who is reviewing this country's policy on iran. there seems to be a recognition of the fact that the previous administration's policy of ignoring and belittling iran has been a failure. and there's a sense there may be at least a willings in no, sir consider other ways of dealing with iran and perhaps reaching some sort of place of comfort to talk of the issues that are of mutual interest to these two countries. of course, there's an election coming up in iran later this year, in june. it's a presidential election and it will be a profoundly important one. certainly, for iranians everything that matters will be at stake. their relations with the outside world, the economy, and how the government conducts itself and how iranians and their daily lives feel the presence of the state. so for all these reasons, i think it's quite important right now, specifically, to talk about what the real ambitions and attitudes and desires of the iranian people are. and especially young people. and i think that we've seen in recent times what happe

and we're more concerned about what is going on in iran that i will have a job or health insurance. why should i be concerned about what is going on in iran when i might not make it another year or two. i think that the israelis and people who own the media are keeping us distracted. host: so you see no relevance to your life about the events in iran caller: no, it does not bother me one bit. guest: the state of the economy we are en is partly related to the international events, including those of iran. the war for which so many american lives have been lost is related to the interferences and interventions of iran. it is not as if the united states can and has survived,. the world is very much related in is becoming more so. -- it cannot survive on its own, the united states. the people on that 9/11 came from faraway countries. if should become important to you. you would perhaps prosper more and have more security. i am quite offended by calling the whole media that jewish- owned a. it is an insult to the jewish people and to the media. host: good morning on our democrats' line. c

i think his stance on iran is great right now. i think we should stanback and just see what happens over there. i mean, they are already blaming the u.s. for what's going on over there. so i think if we just an back, see what happens and, you know, make adjustments from there i think it would be great. >> this conference was supposed to take place in the rose garden. hot temperatures in the washington area moved indoors. president obama today was asked about this and he will also meet with president bachelet of chile in just a bit. let's go to fort lauderdale, florida. mrs. cynthia on our other line. >> caller: i just want to say it is refreshing to hear a president of the united states express awareness of international tensions and international situations and have some understanding that as of the superpower of the united states needs to listen to other people. and i think that is one of the things that we have been waiting for for a long time, a president who listens to what other people have to say, even people who disagree wi

of your statements that iran feels it's on the role in the run on the image level and on the justice level in terms of supporting so-called righteous resistance in lebanon and palestine, at various gcc summits,sick joke that circulates is that america attacked iraq and iran won. without firing a single bullet or shedding a single drop of blood. >> thank you. okay. since there were a few questions within that, we'll have you respond and then we'll move on. just one or two questions after that. >>. >> a couple of points. i definitely agreed with most of what you said. i would suggest that whether it's the united states acting without israeli collusion or israel acting by itself, israel -- israel and the united states would be considered to be in collusion, certainly by iran, and iran will try to promote that perception in the arab world. so i am not sure there's going to be as far as perception is concerned a big difference between just us rile -- izre a-- israel attacking and just the united states attack figure that were to come about. that's just something to keep in mind. we should

on iran, do the events of the past few weeks and even the past few days forestall your ability to have any sort of meetings or dialogue with them on the nuclear issue? are you losing precious time on that issue? there has been an upsurge of violence in iraq. will that have an effect on the deadline to withdraw the combat troops? >> on the iranian issue, which are still waiting to see how the situation plays out there. i continue to be deeply disturbed by the reports of violence taking place there. i continue to call on the iranian government to deal with people who were peacefully protesting and wanting their voices to be heard in a way that respects international principles. there is no doubt that any direct dialogue or diplomacy with iran is going to be affected by the results of the last several weeks. we do not yet know how many potential dialogue will have been affected until we see what has happened inside iran. this is the point i was making earlier in response to the other question. we have a continuing set of national security interests that are going to have to be dealt with.

president, is on the iran inelections and the second will be -- on the iranian elections and the second will be covered after that. i convey some brief remarks on the remarkable events we are witnessing unfolding in iran in the last couple of days. it is too soon to tell what will happen but we, what we do not know, i should say, if iran's brittle, these creatic regime will hear the voices of reform emanating from such powerful, in such powerful fashion from the streets of iran today. we do not know if a credible investigation of serious electoral irregularities will occur but i'm confident that the events of this past weekend will be recorded in the history boxes for a major milestone for the iranian people. the hard-liners that continue to rule iran may further entrench their power in the coming days, they are only planning the -- planting the seeds for their defeat by the response to the democratic voices with the kind of force and suppression that we've seen play out on television. it's a promising sign that iran's supreme leader called on the guardian council to assess the claims o

iran. after that, house for debate on the iran support. then, the iranian supreme leader on the election and the protests. >> every weekend, "book tv" has that latest books and nonfiction authors on c-span2. the history of the world, through a collection of 600 short stories. he talks with columbia university professor john dingus. also sunday, books on the economy. former investment banker john talbott expose is the myths about the recession and what it will take to recover. and j. richards on the best way to protect the environment. also this weekend, the end of overeating, former fda commissioner david kessler explains how americans, program by too much sugar, salt, and junk, can control their eating habits. there are lots more books and authors this weekend on "book tv." we have simple ways to share your favorite programs. booktv.org. >> how is c-span funded? >> through donations. >> i think you get a little bit from the federal government. >> grants and stuff like that. >> may be from sponsors. >> it might get some government funding.

iran in an effort that produced the current government. we will be waiting to see that once we get through this, that is one of the areas where we will see what iran has -- is prepared to do. we have the ministerial meeting coming up next week on the margins of that. it will be focused on afghanistan and pakistan. iran has been invited to attend that meeting. we will see if they accept. >> [unintelligible] >> i am not aware of it. >> there appears to be a significant division within the administration when it comes to darfur, and whether or not there is a genocide occurring there. yesterday, they say they are seeing the remnants of genocide implying that the worst violence is behind the region. on monday, ambassador rice -- can you clarify where the administration stands on that? >> edit there is no question that genocide has taken place in darfur. we continue to characterize the events as genocide. we want the special envoy to do just -- scott briefly yesterday. he spent a lot of time on the ground and sudan. -- in sudan. there is less violence as a result of court it government actions as it -- and that has existed in the past. our goal is

iran? guest: it's thrilling what is going on in iran. in the run-up of the election, twittering, i don't know the verb. twitting was important. when the ayatollah came back in 1969, he was using cassettes. the world moves, 30 years late we have internet and satellite dishes, purities have established of sealing out outside forces. socializing the people. it's impossible nowadays, simply impossible. furthermore the median age of iran is 25, they are not going to be governed indefinitely by medieval clerics. it's not going to happen, and we are saying what happened in philippines when marcos call for election from the senator from nevada. fed the election, and it was obviously fraudulent, and people came out and four days later he was gone. but that these changes are coming to iran is obvious. host: we had a woman who wrote reading alida in tyrann and one talked of the china presence in iran. guest: sure china being a permanent member of the security council, and having these close commercial relations with iran. this is one reason why we

as i recall it was blocked last year by a republican to put some strong burst sanctions on iran and we will give you some information on that. >> the sanctions now inappropriate response to how they are taking from investors? >> i think the president -- i don't want to get into the tit-for-tat on that. >> to follow quickly use of sanctions are something we discussed you mean generally. >> yes, thank you, yes. >> i have three topics but one question on each. >> don't tell me. [laughter] >> does the white house believe the congressional budget office is an effective and reliable arbiter on the scoring of health care proposals and does it have -- >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> does it have any say about the house speaker and kristoff who are significantly years in the debate both from the last 48 hours criticizing cbo methodology and the scoring that has come up -- >> remember, i haven't seen the exact comments but remember i think even -- >> she said she's frustrated because the cbo in her words comes up with a worst-case scenario and has never understood why we have to please the cbo and

if we put sanctions on gasoline, the administration in iran is going to love it and jack up the prices. with regard to sanctions and other sectors, we keep on looking this and say -- i wonder if they had increased the oil production to $8 billion -- to 8 billion barrels, i wonder if we would've had to pay some much for a barrel of oil. our sanctions have resulted in europe becoming dependent on russian gas. i thought they were our allies. it has made turkey pay for gas. turkey, charging 15% will be self-sufficient in natural gas. they would be happy. pakistan and india -- it does not happen. the sanctions are not only hurting the iranian people, they are putting our allies at risk, hurting the turks and damaging pakistan. i do not think the sanctions have been effective. that is a minority position. >> it happens to be one that has strong evidence behind it. thank you. >> i do not think that anything that has happened in iran has changed the limited options that the obama administration had prior to what has happened. even before these things happen, there were suspicions about militar

and nowhere is that more true than in the struggles on the streets of iran. these people suffer under a dictatorship. we should unapologetically be on the side of those people in iran who want democracy and freedom because that will lead to peace between our peoples as well as freedom. this is what happened with reagan in the cold war. he ignored those who told him not to be belligerent. we need to be belligerent to tyrants to speak positively and be on the side of those people that long for freedom. what happened? the cold war ended. we give that message to the tyrants and the people that were suffering behind the iron curtain. with a strong stand, we can encourage the people by letting them know the american people are on their side. maybe we can this may the dictatorship and it will also pass away just as common as an did. what a gift to the world that would be, simply for staying true to our principles as americans. >> sitting on the intelligence committee, recognize that this is a very complex world. foreign policy is very hard. how do we move, how we see

. >> now a discussion on iran, its relations with the u.s. and its neighbors and the upcoming presidential election there. the rand rand corporation in washington, d.c., hosted this event last week. it's about an hour. >> okay. we are going to resume and we will start as people flow in. as is our panel before hearing from a doctor krasinski at our lunch. you probably will be grateful to know that we only have one more powerpoint. this is a grand conference so of course it is often powerpoint heavy and we apologize for that but we try to limit it as much as as much as possible today. i think you will find david's powerpoint well worth the. we have two of our senior analyst at rand resenting the external perspective today. we heard a lot this morning about negotiations with iran, the internal domestic situation within iran, factionalism, the economy. now we are turning to a ron's place in the broader region. and we will start with david who will be focusing on iran's military power projection and their capabilities, and it will be followed by f

let me finish by just saying that on june the 11th, i marveled at the fact that iran had come such a long way. and that the population was no longer wishing to reshape the structure of the state, but insisting still on its say in the policy direction of the country. they were making a choice between two candidates who, in the process of the election, had convinced the electorate, rightly or wrongly, that they would leave the country in different domestic and foreign policy directions. today it is clear that the century old yearning for a set of agreed upon rules has not succeeded. yet their reaction to what has happened suggests to us that there is still a ways to go. still searching to find a compromise solution that cannot find the proper balance of accommodation. in the direction of the country that cannot get along, as such it keeps itself open to periodic and unpredictable outbursts in rules that are accepted by both sides. >> thank you. excellent. our third comment is by fariborz ghadar, senior strategic advisement in washington, he holds the william h. meyer chair of global lan

later, a conversation on iran's nuclear program and the political situation in tehran. live coverage from the heritage foundation begins at 10:00 eastern, also on c-span 2. up next, a number of federal judges talk about ways to improve the u.s. unusual system. from the american constitution society, this is 1:35. >> our first session of the morning. thank you all for coming. as you know, the title of this session is improving the court, the perspective from the bench.

>> on the iranian issue, i think we're still waiting to see how the situation in iran plays out. and i continue to be deeply disturbed by reports of violence that are taking place there. i continue to call on the iranian government to deal with people who were peacefully protesting, wanting their voices to be heard. there is no doubt that any direct dialogue or diplomacy with iran is going to be affected by the events of the last several weeks. we do not yet noknow how any potential dialogue will have been affected until we see what has happened inside iran. i will tell you, and this is the point and was making earlier in response to jeff's question, we have a continuing set of national security interests that are going to have to be dealt with because the clock is ticking. iran is developing a nuclear capacity at a fairly rapid clip. they have been doing so for quite some time. iran pose a possession of nuclear weapons would trigger an arms race in the middle east that would be bad, not just for u.s. security, it would be bad for the security of the entire region, including irani

in the campaign on fortunately the great people of iran were in -- insulted. why she would disappoint people with ourselves? why should we be so infatuated with power? i personally am not keen on charging such issues. for years i tolerated of those. all these insults directed to me myself i forgive it all and i still like to forgive on this. i announced it several times, but i cannot allow people to be insulted and people's shlaes and actually people's understanding. this i cannot let go. people do not allow me to take it easy when their dignity is being insulted and in my meetings with people in various cities extensively come and ask me to go to their defense and defend their positions. the root of these misdemeanors and lies and deceptions should be publicized. already promised people to let them know what is happening and i think today mir-hossein mousavi is not sitting in front of me, it is not mr. mir-hossein mousavi alone, it is three consecutive governments in front of me facing me. it's mr. mousavi, mr. khatami. he served in previous term. as a matter

one reason i wanted to go to iran, incidently somebody had sent me a year ago, one of those internet slide shows and i watched it and it was a slide show like 40 shots of tehran. i've never seen a shot of tehran before. for some reason i thought it was just, you know, a scary cross between khamenei and stalin or something like that, just by the propaganda that we get and i looked at this thing and it looked like vancouver bc, high-rise condos, snowcapped mountains, business energy, i thought it was amazing. i wanted to see the city. it's amazing i don't know anything about iran. so we learned a lot about the city. the traffic is crazy. [laughter] you've got eight teams coming together with no stop lights. [laughter] i felt this is a developing world city, they've got broken lights and nobody fixed them. no, they just didn't put lights there, they don't want them. why stop? you can shuffle through and carry on. [laughter] on initial reaction is that is insane. but they like it and it seems to work quite well. [laughter] it's so different. i spent a lot of time in traffic you can imagi

since we are on iran, i know nikko is here from huffington post. i know you and all across the internet we have been seeing a lot of reports coming from iran. i know there may actually be questions from people in iran who are communicating through the internet. do you have a question? >> i wanted to use this opportunity to ask you a question trekkie from an iranian. people are still courageous enough to be communicating on line, and one of them wanted to ask you this. under which condition would you accept the election of ahmadinejad, and if you do accept it without any significant changes in conditions there, given that a betrayal of the demonstrators there. >> we didn't have international observers on the ground. we can't say definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country. what we know is that a sizable percentage of the iranian people themselves, spanning iranian society, considered this election illegitimate. it's not an isolated instance, little grumbling here or there. there is significant questions about the legit

we shouldn't stick our nose in what is going on in iran. that is what the u.s. always do. we have the people on the focus on the people in iran, have you senators calling out to bomb iran. what happened -- it is just so phony. they're not even concerned about what is going on in america. people without health care, people dying on the street. where is the outrage when you have people dieing on your streets. they're so concerned about what is going on over there, i think it is a political play on the republican side. i have more to say, you call in and want to say so much. you forget what you want to say. i'm happy that the president is handling this situation the way he is. i think he's not a cream puff. everyone wants to insight more war, go over and bomb and kill. the approach the president -- how he's going by it, i think it is the right way. we shouldn't interrupt. we shouldn't stick our nose in their affairs. host: based on what the president said so far and the things you're hear coming out of iran, what has been the reaction of the people there? do they appreciate wh

time watching in a measured approach and not become the focal point of the aspect of what is going on in iran. >> host: from new york city, cristina is on the democratic line. >> caller: good morning. >> guest: good morning. >> caller: i want to make one comment and too quick questions. you are doing an absolutely fabulous job. i hope to stay in a long time. [laughter] >> guest: well that is all up to the voters as you know. >> caller: why will do whatever i can for you. [laughter] >> guest: thank you. >> caller: two questions. are we ready, anti-missile ready in the united states, and then one quick question i hope i can ask an environmental question very quickly. i entry concerned about the families killed in alaska and what are you doing -- i'm sorry to get off topic but i'm interested in that -- >> guest: one second, i missed the 90 -- >> host: wolfpack, wolf kunkel. >> caller: yeah, there's like a big deal going on over there and i feel so bad about it. >> guest: you bet. i will try to go through those quickly. one of the comments we received in committee and there was a very direct ques

wondering if you could comment on the linkage that exists between engagement with iran and the arab-israeli diplomacy. >> i think that the bate switch comes first is utile. i think each affects the other and if there is no progress on the israel palestinian front and the issue thereby becomes more intractable isn't very helpful and how were dealings with iran because indirectly hamas, hezbollah and others are involved and vice versa. if we don't have any serious movement with iran, not necessarily movement towards the real agreement but on the whole set of negotiations in which some issues might move forward more rapidly than others that is also going to create a more negative atmosphere so i would say that to our kind of interactive. i don't accept the israeli position we have to deal with iran before we get serious in the peace process but i don't take the opposite of that is true either. it is an interactive process, both issues. both issues are potentially dangerous and damaging. >> to what extent do you think this correction that is developing in the last few days especially will the f

he would give us his view on the post-election relations in iran. attitude of the iranian people to the islamic regime, and has ideas on what the west should do about it. after he speaks, he will take your questions. line up at dtw alternating marker fronts, go left and right. -- line up at the two alternating microphones, go left and right. we have this room until all o'clock 30. afterwards, -- until all o'clock 30. afterwards, if you will be available for interviews at the end of the hall. as you leave, please add your name to the signing sheet outside. thank you very much. >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you all for coming. thank you for your time and attention to the cry for freedom and democracy on the streets of iran. i cannot -- i can tell you firsthand how much my compatriots are appreciative of your generous attention to their plight. the best i can do for you today is to recount what my fellow iranians tell me about their conditions, hopes, and fears. bear in mind that for the great majority of iranians born after the islamic revolution, th

obviously as you mentioned he met with advisors both saturday and sunday on the topic of iran. but i don't know what external information via the internet or what sites he's gone on on that. i don't know that. >> if i could ask one more thing on smoking. during the campaign the president, senator at the time, and mrs. obama went on "60 minutes" and used his smoking as part of his sort of campaign narrative, if you will. he's used ice biography in many areas. why not use this as an opportunity, if he has or if he hasn't quit smoking, to discuss this with the american people or even offer a warning to young children about smoking? >> well, again, i think he was fairly forward today in discussing the fact that this is, as i've said throughout the last couple weeks, something that he continues to struggle with. >> he used about eight words in the speech as opposed to saying. >> i don't think what the appropriate worth count would have been in order to check the box, but i -- and again i think the president spoke about this in personal terms regardless of the word count. >> something

if you could comment on the link to the extent that it exists between engagement with iran and arab-israeli diplomacy? >> i think the debate of which comes first is futile. each affects the other. if there is no progress on the israel-palestinian front and the issued thereby becomes more intractable, it's not going to help in our dealings with iran, because it directly hamas and hezbollah and others are involved. if we don't have any serious movement with iran, not necessarily movement with agreement, but movement on a set of negotiations in which some issues might move forward more rapidly than others, that is also going to create a more negative atmosphere in the middle east. i would say the two have interactive roles. it is an interactive process, both issues. a poisoned atmosphere, both issues are potentially dangerous and damaging. >> to what extent do you think the friction over settlements that is developing in the last few days, especially, will constrain to any extent the obama administration in terms of their post-iranian election engagement activities? >> i don't think it will li