tv Capital News Today CSPAN April 22, 2011 11:00pm-2:00am EDT
approached me in the senate chamber and reflect gain on what the loss meant that body and how much they relied on hand to carry the tough fights and now he'd always share credit, no matter what the trees he had achieved, the senator said wistfully, ted taught us to be better senators and now we must be. ..
on the campus and in the city and the commonwealth he loves. next to his brother's library and museum which itself echoes it patriotic call to service we can be certain that edward kennedy will live on and all who will be inspired by the educational mission in this great institute which will probably bear his name. congratulations and thank you all very much. [applause]
>> as senator kirker was speaking leo lean over to me and said doesn't he sound like a u.s. senator. >> great appointment, governor patrick. thank you. [applause] when i first of the institute it was with vicki and ted and i think some people know this all began as ted served 40 years in the senate and they began to talk to historians about what might become an institute breaking ground for today. and those historians met with ted and as a key and others the whole sense of what this could be frankly what it must be. has then what vickie has brought to the table again and again and
again. with a sense of excellence, with the sense of purpose and of patriotism. it's a guiding light to the kennedy institute for the u.s. senate and vicki kennedy. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. i'm going to ask -- could i ask that all of our family, up here. do you mind? , all of our nieces and nephews, too? could you, please? joe, could you, would you, let everybody see you? [applause] he would want it this way. would you let everybody? because i will try to talk fast.
thank you. thank you. what a happy day indeed, and while everybody in our family i just wanted you to see everybody. [applause] this is so important to us. thank you. while everybody is piling up here, i just want to thank all of those who have been part of this program today and all of his colleagues from washington who serve now and those who served before who've made the effort to be here today. all of the colleagues in the government here in the state. all of his friends and all of his staff and people have come far and wide to share in this magnificent day with us. thanks everybody. how great is this? how great is this. [applause]
i just want to thank everyone who's done so much to meet today happen. when my husband was a young team, he went to washington, d.c. to visit his older he wrote another, his godfather, the newly sworn in congressman jack kennedy. his brother showed him around the site of washington, d.c.. the house office building, the senate office building, the supreme court, the library of congress, and the beautiful dome capitol building itself. he was mesmerized, and it showed in his face and his brother could see it. but then his big brother turned to him and said teddy, it's great that you enjoy looking at these buildings, but take an interest in what happens inside of them. in those words literally changed
teddy's life. and that's what we hope to do at the edward m. kennedy institute. encourage and interest what happens inside of our government buildings. and in the process change and enhance individual lives and the life of this great country if for. we want to show how throughout history men and women of good will in both parties came together and address to the greatest challenges facing the nation, civil rights, human rights, equal rights, workers' rights, war and peace, health care, economic opportunity, education, and yes, the budget. she was at the center of many of
these great debates. as we heard earlier, he made his senate speech on the civil rights act of 1964. and he sold that problems could be solved, senators could come together and deal with important issues for the good of the country. he knew that finding common ground was an easy but that was necessary. he once said we are americans. this is what we do. we reached the moon. we scale the heights. i know it. i'd seen it. i have lived it, and we can do it again. and that is what we are going to offer the visitor saw the edward m. kennedy institute for the united states senate. it's the chance to know it and see it and live it so that people can be inspired to do it
again. [applause] we are going to do this in a dynamic and exciting and cutting edge way because edward m. kennedy was dynamic and exciting and always on the cutting edge. we are developing study modules so that participants can hone their skills of persuasion and negotiation. they can immerse themselves in issues, to on the role of senators and see if they can bring their colleagues along with them to learn the art of compromise so if they are studying the civil rights act of 1964 ferc sample, they will have the opportunity to see if they can break the filibuster. if they can garner the votes to pass that historic legislation. they will have all the possible research tools they need at
their fingertips. but they won't have a script. the work of legislating if you will will be up to them. if they break the filibuster and pass the bill, they can learn about what came next. and if they don't, they will learn about the consequences of the failure to pass the legislation. will be real learning. they will know what it is to be in the trenches. they will learn about all of the parts of our daily life that we take for granted if they fail to pass the legislation. like if they don't pass it they find out that the things we take for granted like no discrimination on the basis of race at restaurants and hotels and movie theaters. no federal funds for discriminatory programs in colleges and universities, no discrimination and employment and the elimination of differing requirements in order to register to vote.
we take for granted because the centers can together and live the filibuster. until the filibuster had been broken at compromise had been reached. those are lessons ted kennedy learned and took to heart in the way that he legislated for his entire nearly 47 year career. my husband didn't want a memorial to himself or his achievements. he wanted to create a place that would spark an interest and nurture the believe that public service can be a noble endeavor, that it can lift and change the will and our nation that each of us can make a difference, and all you had to do is try and talk to each other. at this institute, his dream will live on.
>> bill at the ceremony in the u.s. capitol. the portrait painted by tennessee artist michael jay kneal is part of the u.s. senate leadership portrait collection. we will hear remarks from the senate majority leader harry reid, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell and former president, george will you bush. this is 40 minutes. >> i've been asked to request for the cellphone be turned off and that your minds and hearts be turned on. we are here together for a very, very special occasion.
on the top of the washington monument, is an aluminum beautiful shape and there are two words in printed on that. they are in latin and there's actually seven letters, the free is be to god, and isn't it marvelous we're here in this historic chamber now this afternoon and 555 feet above us is this declaration of praising god for all that we have and all that we are. let us pray together. almighty god, we thank you that
we can come together to praise you. we are so thankful for our history as a nation, one nation under god, and we are reminded again that to praise you is the antidote to pride and an admiration for your wisdom is the key to magnificent accomplishments. and gratitude for your good best is the real secret of greatness. this afternoon we honored senator william harrison for his cherished friend benchmark to position surgeon distinguished senator majority leader, we support this man for all seasons who is motivated by the best of all reasons to glorify you if we
are stunned by the multitude of his accomplishments of medicine and government. and then in addition to all that he's done their we think you that you have exemplified your grace and mercy in those many trips to africa to bring his surgical and healing skills to the most remote areas and to the most destitute and neglected people. thank you for his leadership and effort to relieve suffering in haiti and another just had to lead to distrust places in the world. and for his very generous philanthropy. so many of us gathered here together this afternoon and have their own personal stories of bills intended carrying french and our personal needs then no one could hear the afternoon
shooting of two capital guards when dr. frist and picked up his bag and ran to help. or 9/11 when he was the source of comfort and advice and insight, an tracks attack, the countless demanding challenges of the senate leadership, and lord, we know that all of your blessings to the senator he would be the first to say that the greatest are his beloved wife, karen and his three sons, harrison, jonathan and brian. we thank you for karen's leadership here in the capitol and encouraging friendship among the senate espouses and at home and national. and now as the center's portrait is unveiled and hangs here in the capitol, may it be an
affirmation of his continued influence in our time and the impact of his life on american history and together, we say with him laos dao phrase be to god. amen. >> it's a pleasure to be with president bush, leader mcconnell, senators frist and his family and all of you. i've been in public service a long time. i have worked with a lot of publicm glad to say publicly whi told me privately. i've never served with someone who cared more and cared for more as a person and clearly cared more for other people than
bill frist. he spent his entire life making others lives better. senator frist first sought to serve his community in surgery but when he realized he could pursue the same passion of a larger scale he helped so many more. he chose to represent his state in the united states senate and the state twice chose him. he chose to represent his peers in the senate leadership and his peers in fattah we chose him. and they elected him to the role after he served a few years in congress and anyone elected to leave the senate. he may have retired from the senate that he will never retire from the service. through the changes in his career. whether it is the physician of politician, businessman or father. bill frist has never gotten the importance of the individual and the work that he does. he never forgot the nation's
security and a solemn responsibility of the world hinders not only on how compellingly we can inflict pain and how compassion that we can relieve it. to this trend of the country's most prestigious schools and learn from the finest doctors. he hasn't come find his skills to the comforts of the world class hospitals. his briefly performed surgery on the front lines of some of the world's most dangerous and desperate places. senator frist has saved lives, hurt by human hands in places like saddam and those devastated by disasters like last year's earthquake in haiti. dr. frist briefly knows no borders and his cat services without limit or without peer. i know he appreciates the title of humanitarian more than the one for which we honor him with his portrait today. and because he does we appreciate him. above my desk in my office just
down the hall from here i keep a portrait of another great man from tennessee. and another member of congress, andrew jackson. jackson once said, and i quote, one man with courage makes the majority, and of quote. my friend is a man with infinite kurdish who made a fine majority leader. he held the same seat in the united states senate jackson held to centuries earlier in this great building that we call the united states capitol. when he was here in the senate he helped choose the artist for the commission's like this one we are here to see today as we will soon see when we on feel this work of art michael has wonderfully captured his likeness''. so, doctor, senator, mr. leader,
bill, congratulations to you and karen and the boys, harrison, jonathan and brian. before we hear from senator frist, please join me in welcoming the president. senator frist might have the honor of serving with as republican democratic leaders here in the senate. it's my distinct honor and pleasure to introduce to each of you the 43rd president of the united states, george w. bush. [applause] >> thank you all. please be seated. thank you all, please be seated. it takes a really good friend to get me to come back to
washington. [laughter] i am thrilled to be here. laura sends her love to karen and bill. like me he was wise enough to marry a texan. they represent the president and i represent the past. [laughter] welcome those that have served in the past as vice president, mr. secretary and others. i can assure you, bill, that we are delighted to be here to watch you hang. [laughter] welcome not exactly. i appreciate bill frist a lot. i appreciate the fact that he loves and respects his wife. and i love the fact when i was with him he always talked about
his son. sometimes he probably tested his patience but he never was able to break his love. i admire the fact bill served during tough times. but he led the senate in a gentlemanly way. i appreciated the tone he set. this is a guy that could have done a lot of things in his life, he could have, you know, it's kind of inconvenient probably sometimes to think about the public service, but he was willing to be inconvenienced with the comfort of life. i love serving with him. he's a man of accomplishment. he did a lot. and i think when people look back at the record, bill, they are going to say you did a lot of good stuff for america. i really appreciate it the fact that bill frist lived by the call to whom much is given much
as required. someone's a drop we to believe this, senator frist goes to africa to help save lives rather in going home to campaign or slowed with the folks tennessee, this dalia is saving lives on the continent of africa. he has got god-given talent that he was willing to use on behalf of those who suffered. i said you mean senator bill frist? he said exactly who i mean, bill frist, during the senate recessed takes time out of his life to save lives. i thought that was awesome example of what it means to be a public servant. i am delighted to be here to introduce to you the man who -- with the portrait looks like him, too. the man when they unveil it to
peering over an open chest cavity with them old flabby heart thrown aside and guiding my lovkvist hand at a time as we so in a vibrant part which would give life to that person, he would say remember whenever you are doing at a moment's time, you never known it. you were always just renting. i didn't know exactly what he meant, pioneer cardiac surgeon teaching me to transplant, that you were always just renting. thank you, mr. president, for your remarks and being here today. to be with primarily of the frist family, a big family, but the frist family, and obviously many of your admirers and
supporters and friends over the years over the era that we served together. your dad and mother, my parents, the relationship between the first leedy and karen, my siblings from your siblings, i do feel a certain interlocking kinship in our families. and mr. president, sometimes just maybe it might be a george -- george bush-frist [laughter] a little bit scary. if you hadn't run for reelection and this guy right here hadn't chosen to work the reelection and then unknown to us to stand girl ashley half on the reelection campaign and then five years leader of the top of the dome of the capitol gotten
engaged and recently married, we simply wouldn't be here as a family. it's kind of frightening, george bush frist. [laughter] mr. president, we all admire your post presidential grace and i had the opportunity of personally seeing it on the ground. it's funny because smiling over there at a good time kind of sad. they are in here, we are out there. [laughter] not you. please stay. [laughter] set life after the senate is fun. justice uzi the interlocking relationship a year ago and right at that point in time, president bush and president clinton walked together. two days later i was on the ground with berman and who's the been here and has done so much and have the opportunity to spend time with john frist who
is here during surgery, being on the ground, seeing the response to one of the worst three worst earthquakes in history and then president bush and president clinton getting together raising a huge amount of money which is invested and not just throwing money at haiti but to create jobs and hope for hundreds and really thousands of people in the future. you've demonstrated in so many ways that life outside of washington gets all sorts of opportunities to participate and to lift people up and so many ways and i applaud your work in haiti and i have the opportunity to work with you and clinton and bush in the hagee fund. to my colleagues harry reid and mitch mcconnell. it's funny and nice and i am honored but in truth it does represent an era and there's no to senators both past or present who didn't do more to shape that iraq than harry reid and mitch mcconnell and two. our leader, our leader today and
our boxer and fighter who is out there i enjoy working with you and although our opinions naturally and that is what they should do diverge and be in different places at different times you were always forthright in your convictions stand tall, and we all at my ear that. mitch mcconnell, so many days and the center spot recently retired in the current senators would come and mitch mcconnell and i would be right behind the door because that is where the majority leader office is, and the trust, the sharing, the intimacy of human relationships, all of the interest of the country sometimes really tough and agonizing played out under the leadership of mitch mcconnell who she and i while i was majority leader or with a day in and day out, to all of my other senate colleagues again both present and past two today i hope opportunities like this represent a time and moment of
repose but also a time of reflection. you're dedicated work and to realize the more that you leave them when you are here provides that polis, the continuing polls of the democracy that's there. you almost taken for granted while you are here because you are fulfilling their responsibility. but once you leave, you realize the polls every day continuous, sometimes faster, sometimes slower just provided by you. dr. ogle be who you heard is it the lord speaking with that voice? you can't tell. every day, every day, and for those of you from national and tennessee they wouldn't do the nation's business until the chaplain of the senate lloyd ogilvie gave the guiding message and as you have that in vacation a few minutes ago and the
president and i had the opportunity to see a few minutes ago a lot of our staff who've been with me over the years you can't help but realize once you leave the senate that those relationships never end and i reminded of the formal service but after the formal service things continue to happen with other senators, with staff and people who plan calls to gather every night it continues to happen and i'm reminded about two years after i left the senate and after ogilvie left as the senate chaplain of the time and just imagine a gloriously yellowish orange sun rising over the ocean with crashing waves and karen and i had our feet sort of the way of as none other and this is after the senate, but wade ogilvie was out there baptizing a member of my family
and makes you realize the senate relationships are organic and continue to live forever and those closest to me, karen and jonathan and harrison we begin the story with so many of you who did come up from tennessee in 1993 at the journey in many ways because i was out transferring putting new parts in every day and you lost your mind to come to the united states senate and the answer was maybe karen thought we had initiated it. the boys didn't really know. but once we made that decision and i say this to karen, i said once we decided to come to the united states senate, care and never looked back. and never wavered in terms of support and the sacrifices all
of the senators and their spouses who are here know that you have to make and i think you for that. and with harrison and jonathan and brian in 1993, you don't know what to expect. but it's tough. they came as little boys and left as grown men. and i guess that is the greatest gift that kids can give their parents, to karen and me, the fact that they grew during that adolescent period, lots of ups, a few downs but at the end of that grew into an outstanding young men who they themselves are committed to life of service, the greatest gift the children can give their parents. my four older siblings were here. very rare that we altogether they all live within about 2 miles of each other. mary is here and body is here and tommy, the youngest of five children of the family and as i
address her and marry and body and tommy i think and we all think of the mother and dad, the unbelievable people, most people believe that about their parents, but they were humble and they had these basic tennessee values they did their best to pass on to us and you know they are out there smiling looking down and saying this is what we wanted is what we dreamt about to have the five of them together healthy and living out their dream like this for us. mother mac is the matriarch of the family today is the grandmother out there who is the matriarch out of texas and thank you for bringing the thomas family with you today. the historic chamber, talking to the president, many of you haven't been in this chamber from 1810 to about 1859, 50 years but this is where all the great debates took place.
all of the great debates. honestly you don't hear the webster d dates. they all took place in this historic chamber. as i mentioned the majority leader or the republican leader is right on the other side of the doors, and you hear the hundreds of people coming in here because it's the door, the hallway and then it's the door and the desk and then as much knows you hear all the long hundreds of people coming in here indeed the thousands are relief to the respect to this room as the seat of democracy, the upper level of our congress it represents freedom around the world and that reminds me of what kind of makes this place work and that is the staff, it's the team of people who give their time very quietly, silently, tiger leslie to serve
not just the leader but to serve their country the same tradition that is represented by this room today. the staff are the bedrock of this institution and to each of them in this room and listening elsewhere we played a unique role in history. friends who are here who came up, thank you, your sacrifice and contributions and support are what got us here. we've been blessed to know you. shane, why don't you stand up? have your family stand up as well. karen and i have looked forward to this day for many months. we've had a wonderful time literally, you want to keep standing. [laughter] literally working with my three boys and karen on this portrait and other portraits michael
shane those our entire family personally from each and every one about seven and eight years ago stand again as we unveil the portrait which is in the senate reception room permanently painted into wall. he is one of the great portrait artists of our time. he loves the institution of the united states senate. he passionately loves american history. he is a warm and caring individual. i that the opportunity to witness being a great father and spouse. he is a man whose work you can all judge. i asked him to make me a little bit thinner, younger and we will see if he pulled off shortly but shane, to you and melody and willie, thank you for being here today. i will speed up mr. president. [laughter] just fiddling.
let's go. get it moving. [laughter] it is nice to go back to texas and national isn't it? one of the things i don't have any sort of message today, but one of the things you do hope to do even if you are just renting space like we as senators and members of the house is that you leave something here, a hint of something that makes it a little bit different or that shape said in a way or maybe makes it better, and i hope -- what i hope that karen and i have done left the senate with a mere suggestion, the hint of return to this concept of the citizen legislator, someone who comes to the senate from a regular job, heart transplants are a regular job, but they are not a political job to come for the
purpose of time with no intention for making a career of a politics he just had, you are just renting time whatever you're doing look at it that way. you never own at. and then voluntarily leaving and entering hopefully another more productive phase of your life. i think we've moved to far away from the non-career politician, all sorts of reasons for it. you probably didn't know from 18101859 when this was used as the senate, just as an example of physicians of that 50 year period there were 17 doctors elected to the united states senate over that 15 years. over the 50 years i was elected to the united states senate that 50 years, 1950 to 2000 remember
there was 17 back in this room. there was one position and that was me. it doesn't tell an exact story but what it does say is i think we need to go out and get people with real-life experiences from all sorts of places and dredging them to run, and i hope that our service, karen and my service your says you can do it to the store with a can go home and your family can stay intact financially at a little bit of your family can stay intact and you can live the rest of your life and inspire other people who flee to do it, jump in and do it. i never served the public office or run for office in the past, voluntarily coming and voluntarily leaving and one individual who is in here with us who couldn't travel but who i talked to and sent a letter as well one who's had the distinct privilege of representing degrees take tennessee, the
right of your state and i think all of you who have and to represent tennessee today and also the privilege of serving in that office as majority leader of the united states senate and that of course is howard baker in fact was he when we were deciding whether or not to run what was point out to me that the great who are in this room debating the henry clay, daniel webster, john c. calhoun indeed were not career politicians and was rotational but the time and they would run and go back home and do whatever they were doing and then they would come back a period of time and in fact henry clay served as a senator on four different occasions rotating through and going back home between 1806 and 1852. howard baker is the epitome of what it takes to leave the united states senate to set to senator baker we love you and thank you from the bottom of our hearts for that very early
encouragement to take a doctor who yes was out there treating patients one-on-one everyday to run for the united states senate having never run for public office and never served for public office because if it were not for the simple inspiration and encouragement of somebody that has been at this podium and in this chamber we simply wouldn't be here today. the key treasury this special day, which it's not me it's not part it's not our family but the day itself which really represents the respect of the greatest and the most unique of all institutions in the world i truly believe the united states senate. god bless you all. thank you. [applause]
it's wonderful to see you again. mr. president, great to welcome you back to town. my friend and colleague harry reid and of course our al-marri today bill frist you are a lot of stories tall bill touched a lot of lives and i will share with you my favorite fort campbell covers the border of tennessee and kentucky the post offices in kentucky suite claim that the was a young assistant division commander of the 101st airborne was observing a lot of fire exercise and a young
soldier trapped hormuz handled himself in one way or another and discharged his weapon and shot the division commander light in the chest. it was pretty clear, pretty early that this fellow was in trouble. in god and a helicopter and flew him down to nashville where the young surgeon bill frist saved the life of general david petraeus. and so the influence and the good work of bill frist is far and wide. and it's fitting that we are here to honor this good man. i want to welcome as others have the members of the frist family and it is indeed a large one a lot has been said about this good man and i would like to add just a brief word of my own. when you come across a man like
bill frist, you can't help but wonder where does it all come from? i mean, no one doubts it takes a lot of natural talent to become a top transplant surgeon. no one doubts it takes a little hard work to switch careers in the middle of one's life and then your new career flourished and rise to the top as quickly as build it. but his accomplishments are singularly impressive you suspect there's a little bit more to it than that i think bill provides for himself in the book that he wrote about his own life. there he recalls as a child growing up in national he grew accustomed to the sound of his father's car pooling of the drive we in the middle of the night to make a house call.
he got used to play a site by strangers thanking him for something his dad had done for him for them. and he recalls when it came time to say his prayers at night he didn't want to nail down and he asked his father if he could say his prayers in the dead instead. his father would respond bill, the lord doesn't answer a louisianan's prayers. [laughter] he writes about the generosity of his mother, the goodness of his wife, the daring of his older brother, and the grandfather who's single act of heroism nearly a century ago continues to inspire a family to serve today. it's clear in other words bill frist has had the benefit of a good example. through our association with
him. like his father he's combine public service with the doctors concern for people he's sure all of us here and many others what it means to serve and that is a legacy that any man would be proud of. and now i've been asked to invite karen harrison, ashley, jonathan and brian to come for the unveiling and that everyone invited all the rest of you are invited for the mansfield room shortly now for the reception. [applause]
long island university created the george polk awards to honor special achievement in journalism. the night before the annual award ceremony of new york some of the winners gathered for a seminar. this year for investigative journalists discuss how they lift the veil of secrecy around sensitive subjects michael hastings talks about his rolling stone article on general stanley mcchrystal and we will sweep from thompson and "washington post" reporter dana priest.
this is an hour and half.nd specter went to introduce first to again be acknowledged in the office there you are, sydney,acn our curator emeritus. [applause] here >> thank you very much of the steinberg. i'd like to welcome you all here for this event. one time the seminar is a one kind of get year you get to wrestle with the major issues about journalism and to discuss them what some ot our winners. i would like to say first of alt i'd like to acknowledge ther center for communications which is ave co-sponsor and its d executive director kathryn williams. the the phoenix this year is penetrating the veil of secrecyh we have trouble trying to come up with the right metaphor butk
the idea.tand how the reporters quote pursuine other subjects and how they use their considerable an array of o tools and skills to get the information that's hard to get and it's hard to penetrate the wall of secrecy that surroundsyr so many of our institutionse. today both public and private. in this day there are more and more authoritarian regimes, cor governments, corporations and my other entities like the military that are keeping more things secret and then crying out and publicizing the secrets as morer than before for people who liver in both democracies and under dictatorship. to from watergate to wilkie wikileaks, the war and the tak revelation it takes different
forms and different shapes and t different times and it remains the same. in we tonight we are fortunate and a. relief star-studded panel. the sreporters that you see on the stage have all done majorane investigative work and they left about the military the military, prison the agencies and police and of prison system. all four of those institutions have a premium on guarding their to secrets. let me introduce them michael olling hastings. probly his issue in the july rollinglo stone was almost as explosive as ph the coverot photo of lada gaga e immediate dismissailing of -- dismissal of general stanley
mcchrystal in afghanistan. for six years, mr. hastings worked for "newsweek" including a two year stint in iraq. he covered the 2008 u.s. elections for the magazine, and then left, i think he quit in to a certain amount of disillusionment. he wrote an article for "gq" stating objectivity is a faulty. he wrote a book about the death of his fiance, an aid worker killed in a bombing in iraq called "i lost my love in baghdad, a modern love story." to his left, dana priest is one of the countries foremost invest good investigative reporters working for four years on the "washington post" on beats including the pentagon, national security, and intelligence. she's covered the invasion of panama and wars in iraq, kosovo
and afghanistan and traveled widely with army special forces in asia, africa, and south america. she's won numerous awards, so many if i were to list them, we'd be here half the night just listening to them, so i'll just say they include two very special ones, two george polks and two pulitzers, one for revealing the existence of black site prisons, the cia interrogation centers overseas, and a more recent one for disclosing the horrendous conditions at walter reed army medical center p. she is the author of a much acclaimed book, a plies diser finalist -- pulitzer finalist in keeping peace with america's military. further down the line is ac
tompson. side do to journalism through a in .. the san fransisco bay area, he was a self-proclaimed rocking the couch circuit. [laughter] he was an editor then with specific news service who happens not incidentally to be this year's winner of the george polk lifetime achievement award. he began freelancing and writing for the "san fransisco bay guardian" specializing in abuse in authority and corruption. he now works for propublic cay and port of a book called torture taxi and won a george polk for local reporting >> the front line documentary that won him this year exposes
killings of civilians by police in the aftermath of cay tree that in new orleans. i think we have a snipit of the introduction that we can play now. ♪ ♪ >> tonight on "frontline" an exclusive investigation. in the chaotic days of hurricane cay tree that. >> people were shot and killed by the new orleans police officers. >> this will not be tolerated. >> as rumors circulated about a declaration of mar shall law -- >> i heard rumors it was in place, and then i heard rumors, that, no, there were not. >> i never declared the law.
>> they believed they could suspend their own rules. >> did they expect us to go through the streets shooting looters? >> new evidence shows an order giving police officers authority to shoot looters. >> one of the most troubled police in north america, this reverts back to what it's been. >> that's the one that beat me. >> tonight, the story of one of those killings. >> what happened here wound upsetting this chain of events in motion that turnedded the new orleans police department upside down. >> bodies don't burn up like that. >> the way it was destroyed tells a story. this was a premeditated homicide. >> the fronline investigates, law and disorder in new orleans. ♪
[applause] >> finally, wilbur rideau. if anybody knows about secrecy behind the walls, it's he. he came in through a back door. he got interested in journalism while serving a lifetime sentence for murder, of of it on death row in the notorious louisiana state pen ten rideau known as angola and sent there at 19. in 1976, he became editor of the prison newspaper, the angleite and used it to shine a lite on practices that were rarely talked about.
a film he directed behind bars won an academy award nomination. "time" magazine called him the most rehabilitated prisoner in america, and yet for years, he could not get out. finally in january 2005 after a jury convicted him on a lesser charge court order, he was released on time served. he's the author of a book "in the place of justice" which i have to recommend to you. i'm halfway through it, and it's an absolute page turner, and he won a george polk award in 1979, but could not obviously pick it up, so he is here and will be at our luncheon tomorrow m i think we even have footage of him in angola. >> as we take an extrordz their
look inside -- extraordinary look inside angola, louisiana's maximum security prison. he has already spent 33 years on the inside. no one knows prison life better than rideau. he spent his entire adult life with convicted killers, and he knows them well because he's one of them. in 1961, he was sent here for stabbing a 47-year-old woman to death. he was 19 years old. >> all the social crutches that prop you up and enable the average person to walk around and go about their lives, all that is removed. i mean, you have absolutely nothing. you got to build an existence in a vacuum. >> he did just that teaching himself to write. an 8th grade dropout became the editor of the prison magazine and won national awards in
journalism about the stories of the violence, depravity, and dangers that come with the life in prison. we asked him to take us into this world that he knows so well. now, you're about to see pictures of prison life from the inside out, images no one on the outside could possibly get. [applause] >> we'll have a discussion running perhaps 45 or closer to an hour. i want to leave time for questions from the audience. when you do have questions, and please make sure they are questions, not speeches -- [laughter] we have a microphone at the bottom of each aisle. you'll need to actually speak into the microphone to be recorded. i'd like to start with you, dana. your series, top secret america, an absolutely chilling
description of a kind of national security concerns in bureaucracy run amuck. i think you said that tapping into the funds released after 9/11, there's something like 1271 government organizations and 1931 privet companies -- private companies working on counterterrorism and related things. you and the coauthor took two years to gather material. how did you get the idea for it and go about assembling all that information? >> well, briefly, i've covered intelligence and the military after 9/11, and when we got done trying figuring out what happened on 9/11, who al-qaeda was, we asked what is the government doing to try to fight this war now called the global
war on terrorism? unlike the military which is a relatively open organization compared to the intelligence world, you couldn't find out because all of this was classified. that's the secrecy vail we were up against, but managed to write about the cia for many years and other parts of it, and then at a certain point we talked on the phone a lot about what we're seeing, what do you think it is and that sort of thing, and there's something going on here that's very big, and it's structural, it's probably permanent. you know, i can feel it wherever i go, the number of organizations, the number of proliferation of code names, the slang, the units, and now that we try to figure out how to map
it because -- and how to describe this huge thing which is big because the military is large and there's 18 intelligence agencies within the government, and so we took our time figuring out, well, how would we do that? we decided based on in part an experience that i had doing the black fights knowing the cia, you can put a coverup over things that you are trying to keep secret, but everything lives somewhere, you know? it doesn't live in the clouds. it leaves here on the earth, and so we said, well, what if we then did sort of a mapping of our own of what we came to call an alternative geography of the united states, sort of mapping the dna of the secret world, and we started at the secret level on looking for units and organizations and companies that did work through government at the secret levels, a different
kind of classification. we said we could never get through this, let's elevate it to the top-secret level which is more difficult because that's a huge leap. >> sorry to interrupt, but how do you get the names of the companies in the organizations? >> one fun story about that. i mean, some of them is -- were a process of just taking the organizations that we knew. bill is a self-described self-compulsive person who likes to look at lists and looks at government areas where people don't look at and if there's an anomaly, he spots it and puts a card into a box, and for years he went through and tried to find these things. to give you one example -- he had a name of an organization he was convinced was a secret organization, so i got the address and i went to crystal
city where it was located, and we knew the street and the name and the floor it was located on because he had records of wiring contracts that would wire fiberoptic cables from one office to another, and so he knew that there was a triangle of wires between this organization, a fairly secretive organization in the pentagon and another building by the same organization in another place in crystal city. i went looking for it. we even knew what floor it was on, and we go into the lobby and looking for the 15th floor, and the lobby had a directory that was electronic and scrolled the names of everything in the building, and it stopped on the 14th floor. i was looking for the 15th floor. [laughter] so i went up and got into the elevator, and i saw there was a 15th floor button, so i pushed it. [laughter] i went up and, you know, ready
for who knows what, but found a janitor instead vacuuming the carpet. [laughter] there was a door with the sign and camera that, you know, looked at you and the one sign said go away and all of that, and then did the same thing for another building which was also in the triangle, and, again, they marquee they had outside, this is an air force building, had a lot of the names for different air force organizations, but nowhere was the defense policy analysis office. again, it didn't exist, and so clearly we learned if i went back to the crystal city place they i had gone through in reporting about the military, i now started looking at marquees, and there's these big story buildings, like 15-storiesal and had nothing on the marquee other than joe's pizza place that was downstairs.
[laughter] he would do his things on his deep web searching which is something everybody should learn to do better, and with contracts, paperwork, a lot of interviews i did with people who i knew for a long time. in the intelligence world, you have to accumulate sources over a long period of time and pointed in other directions and came up with over two years time a map that actually pinpoints where it all is, and then we tried to figure out what all these things did, not in any real detailed level, but generally, and then you'll see on the welcomes which is washingtonpost.com/secretameric, and you can play with the data base and it shows you how many things work on x, y, and z, and you'll see a big pattern we found that this thing had not
just grown, but doubled in size and most have prior to 9/11 and it was growing so quickly that no one paid attention to where it was going. if you had an idea, you could get it funded. therefore what developed was a huge redundancy in any place you can imagine. >> in fact, we may have a chart or two that ran with this story. if we could throw that up. i think they are kind of amazing. it shows -- all right, there you are. [laughter] look at that. the idea behind the story and why i described it as chilling is there are so many agencies and there's redundancy compartmentalization and everything that no one can possibly get a handle on it. it's like drinking from a fire hose instead of a glass of water. >> general clapper, now the
directer of national intelligence, he said there's one person who knows it all, and that's god. [laughter] >> it certainly wasn't created by god though. [laughter] did you at any time just, you know, when you had o verify the information, i know you interviewed the defense secretary gates. did they say please don't publish this or parts of it, and did you hold anything back? >> oh, we did. you know, i mean, you have -- national security reporting what you're balancing is things that have to be kept secret because lives are at stake, an operation that is not controversial and clearly doesn't cross some line, but could be at stake, and another realm of things that are on a case-by-case basis and it's hard to imagine unless you're on that realm. there's things that are secret
or the government feels that they make it secret, they classify it for a legitimate reason. that's, again, that's what they are doing. they are trying to work to do it for legitimate reason because it would damage national security is what the rules are, and then i'll all tell them what it is that we have, and so that they can make an argument that if you publish this, whatever argument they want to make, and in this case, they did make an argument that many member details we have had would be damaging, and for us, the -- and actually, they said don't publish this. well, we're going to publish it, can you be more helpful and try to explain what your concerns are, and we didn't get very far. >> can you hold stuff out? >> we definitely held stuff out but because when we internally discuss, you know, what it would
be, we had what i called people who are in the -- who have been in the intelligence who are no longer there and also really value what the post does to talk through the various aspects and could we be setting people up for damaging, you know, results that we didn't want to do, and what we always have to do is we walked as far up to the line of giving readers information that has details to make the story authentic because if you notice, there's not have many people quoted in it. we walk up to the line without hopefully crossing it and without damaging any national security things, but also not putting details that are in that category of classified. you know, really what we're trying to do is make the story -- >> you are comfortable with it? you feel nothing in the article
is nothing really that sensitive? >> well, i'm sure there was a big hoopla over it because for one, it's put all the names of the companies together, and the companies didn't like that even though this is based on unclassified information which is another interesting dynamic that we can talk about in wick leeks is that the same kind of classifying ridiculous things in some cases, and there is an enormous amount of queries out there on the web and elsewhere that can lead you to -- lead you along the trail we took so the government has no idea what is out there to be had. >> yeah, they don't even know. adam, in your documentary, you concentrated on a 31-year-old man and what happened to him. can you tell us briefly your story and why you chose him to tell a larger story? >> yeah, so henry was a
31-year-old man, a father of four shortly after hurricane katrina, and we understand he was going to get some goods that had been taken from a dimestore. there were pots and pans and candles and stuff, and he was shot by a police officer near that dimestore. he sought help. his brother and a good samaritan and another person rushed him for help, and one thing that didn't go into the documentary that's worth saying now is this was on the west bank of the mississippi after hurricane katrina, so it didn't flood there, but there was no power, no water. the conditions were really rough, and it was within new orleans proper and the closest hospital was across the parrish line in the next parrish over and there was a barricade there, and they couldn't get through because there was law enforcement, the sheriff's department set up there, so this was a group of four black men in
a car, one of whom was just shot. the driver said we are four black men in a car. we're not going to get through into the largely white neighbors parrish, and we're going to go to the closest place to get help, and that is to this police encampment up the street at a school. they didn't realize that henry was shot by a police officer, and so they sped him to this swat team outpostthat took over the elementary school. they thought, hey, these guys know cpr, they can rush him to the hospital, treat him here, they probably have medical supplies. they'll help him. but they didn't help him. what they did is they physically attacked the abled bodied men, three abled bodied men, and they left henry to bleed to death in the back of the car, and then the officers took henry's body and the car that the good samaritan had been driving, drove it over behind another
police outpost, a police station, parked on the bank the mississippi river, set it on fire and burned his body and left the car there like he was a piece of garbage, was not a human, and like he didn't matter and left it at that for three years until i started poking into it. >> when you poked into it, you were clearly running a risk. i noticed you even interviewed the deputy, i guess it was the deputy police commissioner. they must have known what you were looking into. did you have any kind of frightening moments? did you encounter hostility? did you get -- how did you get people to open up including his brother who i think was one of the three, wasn't he? >> yeah, you know, there's kind of two important things here, and one is, first like the bigger challenge rather than like the awesome action movie stuff like getting threatened by cops, that stuff --
[laughter] the biggest challenge was bureaucratic, and that's how these things often are. the secret weapon here was the attorney. every piece of documentation we wanted to get, we had to threaten to sue to get. the attorney who worked with me on the tv and on the stories, the print stories, she was the one who did a lot of the hard work. they didn't want to give up anything from the coroner's office. we had to sue them to get the autopsy report. >> tell them what you were told from the coroner's office. >> so i called the office, and i wanted to see the autopsy of people who had died violently after hurricane katrina, and i said, you know, to the staff at the coroner's office, they said, can i make a request? i know this is a public document under louisiana law, and the staffer said, well, do that, but we don't follow the law anyway. [laughter] we sued and prevailed, but
that's how everything was with the police records, the coroner reports, and with everything. the second piece about this sort of fear and df of being menaced by the police, honestly, i was too naive to get it that i should be nervous, and i had uncovered conspiracies before. i documented, done reported that had shown police framed two innocent men for murder, sents them to prison for 14 years, they were exonerated and paid $7 million by the city. i knew these kind of things happened and there were, in fact, times when people did incredibly damaging things and conspired to do them and so forth, but i just didn't get it for two years of time in new orleans, and i would meet these -- i met with a source who said, you know, i don't want anyone to know i'm meeting with you because the police will, you know, if they find out, they'll
plant three pounds of cocaine in my car. i thought this person is crazy and watched too many "training day". [laughter] then after i started interviewing 5 lot of cops who -- a lot of cops who had done that -- [laughter] oh, yeah, i was naive. this is how it goes down in new orleans. >> yeah, yeah. in san fransisco also, you wrote often about police, about social injustice, housing projects, what drew you to this as a kind of specialty? was there something in your background or why are you -- why did you dig deeply into this one particular area? >> well, you know, it's really this, and i've been thinking about it lately, and parablely it was early on in my mentoring and i'm interested in people with stories from the ground up and at the bottom and stories of people who are not being talked
to by the media, and that was the way ai approached all these stories. my point of entry for doing the investigation into what happened with henry was really through his family. it wasn't through people at the top of the police department saying, oh, this horrible thing happened and nobody's doing it, it was the people from the bottom that no one talked to. if anyone had just gone and spent time with them and listened to them, they would have seen this story. that's another kind of secrecy that there are people who just are not listened to. they just don't get a chance to communicate their message, and that's what i've tried to do is lot. >> going to places where others don't talk to people who usually aren't talked to is a whole other world. >> exactly, exactly. >> michael, talking about starting at the top rather than the bottom, your piece on general mccountryal had a -- mcchrystal had a huge impact,
but you said you were surprised by that. did you not know what you had when you printed it? you said you were shocked by the response. >> yeah, well, one reason i'm shocked or was shocked by the response and still am is that, you know, i have been covering the wars in iraq and afghanistan for five years and no one cares about what you write, and i don't mean that ironically. it's just like, there's this jaw-dropping stuff that comes out every week about what's going on in iraq and afghanistan leaving merely a didn't in our public consciousness. my thinking at the time was i knew it was good material, but my thinking was, well, you know, maybe they'll talk about it on cable for a couple hours, and, you know, i'll go on my merry way and write about the -- write a book about the crazy general. i was quite surprised. i guess one of the ways i am
coming from on the story was that, you know, for years doing -- working for "news week" and covering the war in iraq, what i realized happened was the most interesting parts and what i felt was being taken out of what was getting published, and it's not that it was, you know, the news was always there, but it was, you know, the offhand comments, how people really act and what they say and what it's like to be there, the details i find really fascinating, but they never made it. >> editors cut them out, and you thought they were details. >> i'm probably right to say this because they were not necessarily fitting in the medium i was writing for, but what i decided to leave "newsweek" i wanted to capture the details. the first story i did was for
"gq" and i went to afghanistan with a group of 20 guys and talked to people who no one ever listens to, the average private and the specialist. he lives his life not listened to, and here's this dude who says, oh, wait, your job is to listen to the complaints i have? [laughter] unlikely buddies who heard them for like two years straight every day since training, it's new to you? and you're putting my picture in a magazine? yeah. [laughter] >> i have to say there's a lot of good military reporting coming out of both iraq and afghanistan in which reporters talk and live with directly with the people in the conflict. it's a unique perspective. do you think the general should have been fired? >> my point is that -- in afghanistan what i did with these guys was wait -- go on
guard duty with them and listen to them talk for hours. the idea behind the story of general mcchrystal is no one ever really hung out with these top-ranking guys and sort of told it like it was with them, and, you know, so that's what my sort of thing was. you know, should he have been fired? that was president obama's decision and my thinking was well, i did the best i could do and let the chips fall. >> how did you manage to achieve this fly on the wall status? how did you get access? i know you've said the most surprising things happened right in the first 24-48 hours when you met them in paris. how did you in a way get yourself into their confidence, and did you have to establish any ground rules at all? >> well, i didn't have to establish any. i mean, in this case, it was
pretty straightforward. it's not that dramatic. i wanted to do a profile on general mcchrystal for "rolling stone" and i e-mailed the guy and he said come to paris next week. i said, okay. i showed up in paris and i said here's the story, i want to do a story with you guys hanging out in paris, europe, and the other part in kabul, and then they said come on in, you know, and i followed them around with a tape recorder and a note pad, and a lot of this stuff that ended up getting them -- that became controversial was said within the first 24-48 hours, so much so i knew i already had my story, but then the volcano went off in iceland, and i was stuck with them for longer which was advantageous in the end because i got of sense of who they were. >> yeah. i read it now in preparation for
this. i mean, you know, i'd say four or five times, and it's interesting the quotes from mcchrystal from himself are not that damning. there's three quotes, one about biden, ikeen beer -- iche nberry. i won't say it was trashy necessarily. the damaging quotes came from people close to him and under him. >> that's actually not true. if you read the story, the most damning quote that's been quoted by everyone is biden, vice president biden, bite me. that's the quote. >> actually, it wasn't bite me that mcchrystal said. >> right, right, and this is the point that general mcchrystal in that scenario was the first one who started making fun of
vice president biden and let the door open for the comments to follow, so the idea that it was just his aide saying this stuff is -- >> i didn't say it was just his aid, but the material came from people under him. i don't think it makes it invalid in any way or maybe even valid, but many were not quoted by name, so you must have said this is off the record. >> in fact, we have their names in the original draft, but my editors took them out for readability reasons. >> oh. >> so, and there were occasions when they did say stuff was off the record, and if i would have published that, that would have been a real story. [laughter] i stuck to, you know, i mean, one of the sort of interesting
aspects to the story and going back there's a book coming out about it, and i was going back and listening to my first interviews with them, and, my first interview with mcchrystal i have this amazing moment on tape where the adviser says, oh, michael is hanging out with us in paris. he says, that's great, and the press secretary asks for any questions i should ask the staff which, to me, was the closest moment of sort of establishing, you know, some kind of framework for what story they were expecting. >> uh-huh, uh-huh. do you -- i don't mean this a contentious question, but do you think -- obviously your piece created some controversy among your colleagues. do you think it is fair to hang out with somebody over a long period of time or even a short period of time and kind of, you
know, go drinking with them, listen to them -- >> i didn't drink with them. [laughter] >> okay. >> have you read "rolling stone"? >> hang out with somebody and here they are off-the-cuff comments. >> they were not. i'm going to contest everything you say. [laughter] >> jokes, jokes, and i'm not saying they are irrelevant jokes, but just comments, things people say that you know, banter . >> sorry, but -- >> let me finish. [laughter] >> i've heard this before. i know where you're going. >> into a larger portrait in >> sure. these were not just off-hand comments, but got to the idea of civil military relations, and the civil military relationship is the key component to our
counter insurgency strategy in afghanistan. when you have the top general of the war and his staff and the general's responsible for the command, when you have the top general of the war and his staff consistently making comments derogatory about the civilian leadership justified or not to make the comments, that, to me, was clearly an important story to tell. >> uh-huh, okay. wilbur, can you tell us just kind of quickly how journalism attracted you when you were in angola and what it meant to you and what it did for you? >> i discovered when i got out, i discovered myself in, you know, what was at that time the bloodiest prison in the united states, and i saw things that were just absolutely horrific. i had never been in a world like this before, and i just couldn't
believe that people knew what was going on. they couldn't know. the rest of society couldn't know because if they did know, i don't think they knew it was going on. yes, you send people to prison top punished, but not what's taking place in the prison, and i -- by then i decided i wanted to be a writer, so i decided i would try telling what was going on. i wrote newspapers and asked for a forum and the only one that answered me back was a chain of black weeklies for the louisiana and mississippi who said we'd like to have a weekly column from you called the jungle because that's how i saw the prison, a jungle, and i started writing my weekly column.
i didn't know who was reading me. as it turned out several years later, a brand new director of corrections came in and he had been reading me and he liked what he read, and he felt that i wanted to tell the truth about what was going on so we -- he also felt that a big problem in prison and the misconceptions that both the keeper had about each other and ready to believe the worst of each other because of the way they perceived each other and they felt that a free press, you know, the press playing this role out in the streets and the free world. it educates people about people, you know, on both sides, everybody, and he felt that if you could transfer this -- if you could pass -- you see in the
past, information was passed through a prison grapevine, and if you can transfer that to a legitimate forum, a free press, maybe that could change things. he asked if i'd do it. i said only if it was -- wasn't censored, and he surprised the hell out of me by just saying okay. you know, you have to i understand cren corship -- censorship is practiced religiously in america's prisons forever. this is the first time. he just said okay. we shook hands on it, but there was a condition. we were given the power to up vest gait, photograph -- investigate, photograph, anything we could sub stanuate and publish a story as long as
its true, and if we didn't know the story, we had to make an honest effort to find out what we could. the printing was so horrific what are you hiding it for? if the public knew the truth, perhaps they would be moved to change things, and that was the whole gist of it. >> do you find it did help bridge the gap between those who were being kept and those who were doing the keeping? >> it did. they got to understand each other because of what we did was we wrote about both sides. we covered it like a community, the same way the "washington post" covers washington, d.c. and everything that goes on. that's what we did, and we tried to be a very real publication even though we are all self-taught journalists. we didn't know what we were doing, but we had an idea and read other publications and see what they do, okay, let's try to do the same thing, and that's
the way we did it, and we thought we were doing pretty good. >> you certainly had a number of major stories about, you know, sex slaves, about the defective electric chair that was burning people. >> yeah. >> how -- >> well, the fact of the electric chair and we did that because we discovered there were photographs, and what i discovered about the photographs is i realized that they were in court, and none of the other news media would publish it, and i mean, the most effective way to do this is, you know, if you're going to do something, you ought to be able to at least look at what you're doing. if you can't look at it, then maybe you shouldn't be doing it. we published them. we got the pictures, and we
published the pictures. >> what was the reaction among the other up mates -- inmates, the other prisoners, especially say to the story about sex? >> on sex? most of the prisoners as a rule whether they engaged in it or in sexual violence or they didn't, they did not like the story because they didn't want people, their friends and relatives from the outside world to think they had anything to do with this kind of stuff that was going on because understand what we did at that time, prisoners nationwide used to portray sexual violence as isolated incidents, and they were done by gay inmates, you know, weirdos, and the heterosexuals were doing this.
it was done by the passive approve of the administration and they said we have nothing to do with it. we can't control this. well, they were doing it because it divided the inmates. if you have one segment of the inmate population controlling the other and they are slaves, well, you know, it makes the prison a whole lot easier to run, and we were able to get because of this corrections ordered everybody to answer questions when we asked them about their job, they had to tell the truth. if i wanted to see a receipt, i got to see it. >> did you have to run the stories by anyone, by the warden before printing them? >> we had to run it through peggy grisham.
she read it. in fact, she went back to school and took a six month, i think studied journalism just to see what it's about, you know, to be a more effective supervisor because she knew what the director wanted. he wanted a very real publication just like the "new york times," george "washington post" and many others. he was prowled of it. we were able with the sexual violence thing is we were able to get officials from the wardens, chief of security, everybody to admit what they were doing. they admitted, yes, we have visa accommodations and security forces do this, and that's the first time that an administration just admitted that happened. in fact, they reported that at the next american correctional
convention, they were boycotted by some of the other correctional add min straiter -- administrators because they couldn't understand why they let that cat out of the bag. >> i want to talk about the impact of your stories. dana, the black fights that created a huge uproar when that was printed. does it still exist? >> he ordered all the prisoners to go to guantanamo, and them he closed the final one after obama came, became president, they closed the final one in afghanistan, so there are no black fights, and then that led to number of investigations on capitol hill which is ironic because the people calling for investigations knew what was
happening, but when the democrats had little power at the time the stories were published, they said very little, and they became the majority, and they started using it for political advantage, and really, that's when things started happening, although overseas in europe, they immediately had many up vest gageses in every country in europe and they were required almost by the population to investigate and to say whether they had a secret prison, and, of course, the way these were arranged were with the heads of the intelligence agencies or the presidents who usually were no longer in power, so the governments have all denied that they had any prisons where they had them. however, the plane records that show the plane landed in certain places, and so there's a belief about where they were. >> but things have -- your
articles definitely changed the entire sentiments. >> right, in this case i think it's the diffuse issue because we're dealing with the whole system. there's a number of investigations launched, and gates says he wants to review all intelligence programs to cut out redundancy. i think it is something that's moving, but at a slower pace because there's 18 agencies, all separate and independent. congress has a lot of invested interest in not changing things, and who wants to ever say we're not spending enough on counterterrorism. >> yeah. adam, as the new orleans police department you think changed in any significant way as a result? >> prison, the man who shot henry went to prison. [applause] since they started the cycle of reporting in 2007, eight people
have been indicted as a result of the reporting so there was one person who was civilian indicted on hate crimes charges for shooting an african-american man in the face allegedly because of his race, and then there were two officers indicted for lying about their shooting of a man in the back after hurricane katrina, he died, and then the five officers indicted in connection to killing henry, and like you said, one of them got 25 years, another got 17 years, a third is awaiting sentencing, and two of them were acquitted. more broadly what i thought about doing these stories over the last 10 years is those things helped to reform institutions. sending people to prison for killing citizens, that helps reform them. it doesn't do enough though. it's the beginning of that process, and the kind of broader process is underway in new orleans in that the federal government and justice department started a civil side
investigation of the police department saying, well, hey, we want to go beyond just charging people in these individual cases, and they released 158-page report of their findings documenting systemic ongoing civil rights violations by the department. what is likely to happen is the department of justice will go into court with the police department. they will get a consent decree. that will lead to a judge monitoring the department over three or five or an unlimited number of years, and there will probably be a 30-50 point checklist saying hey, these are the things you need to improve in the department, citizen complaints so citizens can complain and have their complaints heard, internal affairs so officers effectively
investigate misconduct by other officers, use of force so that people are not getting shot in the back unnecessarily, and that process is likely to go on for years, but it has the possibility of dramatically transforming the department in a way that goes beyond just sending a handful of officers to prison. >> michael, you've been back to iraq since your article. do you think there's been any shift or change in that relationship between civilian electorat leaders and the people actually running the war in which the power gravitated or maybe even was taken by the military, and also any change in -- you emphasize this very important strategic policy in which they tried to minimize civilian casualties making sold everies -- soldiers feel more at risk. has there been a change with that or change in command or is the military such a large
organization that it doesn't change very easily? >> i think there's still significant problems, civil military problems, and we're going to see that play out in the next few months as the white house tries to push for a draw down of american troops on the july 2011 deadline and general petraeus will try to resist that. in terms of the civilian casualty issue, air strikes are up, so that's pretty significant. these are all incidents that would lead to more civilian casualties. there was an incident that a whole town was wiped out, and we're not rebuilding it. there's no casualties there, and they say there's no difference in the rules of engagement, there has be a series of events. >> dana, you said there were 850,000 people with top secret
clearance and that does not include the private bradley manning. there must be over a million people. if there's so many access with people to classified or top-secret information, how can you keep it secret and should you keep it secret? >> well, there are secrets that i think should be secret. one example, nuclear codes, you know, how you make a nuclear weapon viable, and many others. i mean, i never argue that there aren't, but every panel, you know, every body looking at classification issues in a systematic way say things are overclassified and the incentive is to classify something the safe way in the -- and why risk
not doing enough? let's do too much. you know, that is one -- that's one issue. there's pretty draconian methods for keeping people having clearances. i mean, they do background checks. they get very personal if you're at the top-secret level. they have a secret court that rules on these issues. you don't have as much, as many rights as you would in a normal court, and because there's an economic incentive to keep your clearance because you can make more money in the private sector with a clearance, you know, people do -- people are pretty careful. however, it's just the thing that is happening, two things happening in parallel. one is the government is classifying as it has been for years, overclassifying things, and then hiding them in, you know, separate compartments that get cut up into little
different, into layers of secrecy, and that's one big problem we found. on the other hand, because of technology and social media and what you can do with a computer, you have wikileaks, and i don't think that that is going to necessarily stop because there are many ways to penetrate systems that are supposed to be secure, and as this episode has shown also, and people said, well, why would private manning have access to those cables? i think that's a pretty darn good question. i mean, i don't at all -- i support in -- i mean, i have big problems with julien assange and
his information but the wikileaks cable is fascinating and important and by and large shows the government doing things i think in the right way. >> and it's had tremendous international attention. >> it's had -- >> tunisia and leading to yemen. >> that's also where our foreign policy rests on goods to the public and secrecy with dictators. it's going to be vulnerable. >> but how about this notion that diplomats should have a right to table back home what they think of a leader or point out the leaders' families who are corrupt. what do you think, adam, julien assange who describes himself as a reporter funking as a reporter? do you think what he did was heroic? valuable? deplorable? >> that's a lot of questions.
well, you know, the first thing is, you know, wow, to me i see the parallels between the cables that we learned about from the church commission hearings back in the 70s. they are not dramatic like those, like, let's topple the government, but it's interesting that 40 years later we have the same revelations coming from that communications mode. do i think what we did was heroic? i don't know that most things are heroic, but it's interesting. it had this incredible impact on our sphere. i think for journalists in one way, the important thing it's done is made the idea of journalism the concept of journalism interesting to people beyond our circles, that people started talking about journalism again and important stories because of that. i think that that is weirdly an interesting and important impact he's had, that that's had. a journalist or not?
i think that he's a person who has found a way to get very important -- get very useful information out of a specific target group, and part of the target group are other hacker-type computer expert nerds who have access to this information, and those are not often people we as jowrntists think about cultivating as sources. that's a genius move quite frankly. >> can i read a column that bill keller wrote last week in the "sunday times" magazine that gives a sense of the new world we entered. "the digital age changed the dynamics of disobedience. someone who wanted to cheat had to work at it. one tried for a year to make the pentagon papers public. there was a lot of time to have second thoughts or get caught. but now it is possible for a
whistle-blower or a trader to act immediately and anonymously, click on a website, upload a file, go home, and wait." what do you think, michael, about the whole wikileaks business? has it changed journalism forever or an area that, you know, getting into computers is something that journalists should know more about and begin to cultivate? >> well, i think in terms of mr. keller's description of that, i don't actually think that's accurate in terms of what he did which was over a period of time. you know, think of lady gaga. it was the cds he popped in to down load the file at great risk to himself as to where he was in iraq. >> he says a world now in which this kind of thing can happen. >> i think in terms of, you know, does it -- does the internet -- look, there's so
much information on the internet that's vulnerable. one of the groups who is a defender of the wikileaks and found tons of incredible material, so does it change journalism? i'm weary about pronouncements about the future of journalism changed, but it's another way to get information. one of the funny things in the blog posts is it always says, wikileaks now fulfills the watchdog function that traditional media failed to do other than dana priest who does a great job. [laughter] i think it's quite interesting that clearly what assange is fill a great need for the idea to pierce through the secrecy in a way no one else has been able to do. >> i think we're approaching question time, so if you have a
question, come down to either side of the aisle, line up in front of the mic. meanwhile, i'll ask quickly. have you faced reprisals for anything you've written or threats? i know you had some problems i think after -- >> well, after the story, the house and senate leaders called for an investigation of the "washington post," and their surrogates went on tv. remember, this is a different time. they called for the same thing and it did create a real hostility. i got bad e-mails. i got e-mails that were not civil, some threatening, and that sort of thing. >> michael, did you encounter a lot of, i don't know, complaints? gripes? >> well, i mean, one of the sort of interesting aspects to the
story, and you touched upon it in your questioning period here. i was the only one who asked who do you point in the story? that was a question you posed to me, and that was a response that a number of other journalists had as well. what it illuminated was this sort of extremely cozy relationship that many in my profession established with very powerful figures and how much they cherish that relationship and the idea that anyone could threaten that, you know, causes great concern so the most sort of vicious kind of attacks i would get are from my colleagues. >> other journalists. >> yeah, but i think one of the reasons why i think it's somewhat we kick louse, some of the -- ridiculous, some of the criticism is basically the criticism is wait, this guy wrote down what he heard and saw. wait a minute, we're not supposed to do that.
literally, direct quotes from what people were saying. [applause] and as i said, you know, this is sort of the theme that is now been -- if general mcchrystal was a leader of a gang and i wrote down what i said, no one on cnn would have said, wait, was that off the record? i mean, that's what i just say about that. .. have written? >> there were a couple of dicey moments in new orleans to in the hate crime story. we made contact with somebody in the neighborhood where the hate crime occurred and this person said don't come here. we know who you are. we know who did the shootings we don't have a problem with it if you come over here expect that your life is in serious jeopardy.
spam to be in a cab driver is a much more dangerous. i don't take that seriously. it's more dangerous to do other >> the difference between what he was doing and what we were doing in the stories they didn't exactly write letters to editors , no, you go on high alert and you've got to feel for the tolerance level and you know that this is going to mess up some heads and security and
intimidate and certainly in the prison. >> you have a question? >> i just want to say that a good the number of rules like for example he said he didn't write it down off-the-cuff comments or some rule of that kind i was wondering when it comes down to the bottom line what kind of rahm rules are you stating for you're hanging out with the mcchrystal and was it his fault perhaps he didn't follow these ground rules that you have in mind? if he is expected to be fired,
he would have tried to withdraw or to put all this stuff down. >> i guess i would say that -- i'm not trying to be a smartass here although it takes effort from the putative i apologize. there are four decades with a flea profile looks like and when a public figure invites them to tagalong even if it is just for an hour or a few days or four months, it would suggest a rule of thumb is the expectation of privacy is much diminished and in fact feces' a journalists he writes down might end up in print. so what do they expect of the story? i don't know what exactly the
sort of expected, but it's a double-edged sword because they are performing for the audience and this is what i have always sort of thought and they knew what made a good place to install the and so this idea for them party in paris or hanging out and being the kind of macho supertarget guys that they are i always thought that was part of it for the -- >> i don't know. what they do in up -- will end up saying i haven't talked to them because they haven't commented on the story. >> this whole issue largest want to interject profiles and what you really don't reveal has been
discussed for years and years. some of you may remember 1989 called the journalist and the murder in which he wrote about joe mcginnis who began a book on a man named jeffrey macdonald, telling mcdonald he believed he was innocent thereby gaining access to some private papers and then when the book came out, it was a kind of strong case for his conviction. if i remember the first sentence in the article, it is a shocking opening but it says any journalist who is not a fool or doesn't know what is going on what it meant that what he does is morally indefensible. that question is the sweeping indictment of the field but there are -- it created that year because there are sometimes little vitriol that golan in any profile writing that is to say
you don't always open up and tell the person what you're expecting and looking for things and it's a natural -- -- deacons too it is not to the journalist to narrow the old to become their own field. it is up to the subject to set the ground rules if they want to limit what is on in the background. why do they handcuffed themselves? >> the subject is in the case here and probably with janet malcolm's subject is if it's somebody who doesn't know much about journalism somebody from the street interviewing a think journalists or under an obligation. >> if you're in the public eye and ask the public affairs people it is their responsibility to set and maintain them and raise to the highest level of command it's kind of strange.
>> i'm glad you mentioned that backseat driving is more dangerous than journalism because i wanted to ask the question about a journalist who was a taxi driver and muckraking journalist at the same time and is now on death row. i want to ask something for all of you if you feel any connection with him as the community journalist if you feel any passion about it's also connected to bradley manning who is a whistle-blower in prison and a lot is being written about his rights being violated as well as jamal's writes. >> do want to handle that? >> storm ike i don't know much that much about jamal's qassam fortunately. there are a lot of people who
are caught up in the criminal-justice system and some of the more famous and i still don't know. and, but, you know, i think what you're saying is light and there is a fellowship or a community of journalists or something that's where feeling about why don't know, i intend to try to answer your question and i don't know i am concerned that i don't know the case well enough we have been treated fairly or unfairly i don't know much about it. >> why does the would be treated fairly because i know it's like not to be treated fairly. some of them clutching his
bigger degree the editorial bill bradley manning say in the media out what should chip in fori e defens e a case ast the defenseaks tha of nd be made that to see if he is the one of the sort of great sources of journalists in history where the newspapers and magazines use this stuff all the time that he leaked all the time there's something to be said to advocate on his behalf so they don't spend as much. >> this is mostly for michael but i threw it to the rest of the panel, too would you think the legacy of the pat tallman case is for journalists and also for the country? >> i think the legacy speaking personally what pat tallman's family did to uncover the truth was incredible, gut-wrenching i don't know how the kept at it for so long and that is just my sort of personal feeling about.
clearly there has always going to be this the pentagon that's going to spend the mets' right away and to the extent to step back that to me the legacy is the fact that it's family has been able to tell the story and keep in the public mind >> they've been protected and then it takes work to get sunshine on the facts by nature like that that's why we have protections because the boundaries figure that out a long time ago and set it up that we saw we could keep poking at them. >> i have a couple of quick questions for dana. what extent you think the security apparatus you uncovered is directed downward towards the
four men and what is to correct it in words and how do you see that trending and also to what extent do you believe the various government and corporate agencies operate through soft power like this information and misinformation using their connections and what do they operate through hard power like meeting people disappear and extraordinary rendition and things like that and how do you see that trending? >> because the defense department is the largest by far the largest of all the intelligence agencies, they are directed outward, and so even the presence in the united states they have a bigger mission now in the united states because the northern command but it's not really sustained so most is directed our word.
however, the article i did was on the domestic the department homeland security and some other things, and really there is a incremental trend towards putting things about you in a database because you might have done something that some police officers and some person walking on the street might have fought looked suspicious that can get you into the database you won't have the right to know about. it's called the guardian, the fbi database, and because the technology, the commercially available i've noticed because i asked my researcher to do this, we have this commercially available technology and i can find anybody is security in here, i can find out what credit cards you have and where you
lived since you were 18. it's all there and the companies, they can find out your training habits, your -- all about now to the fbi because the commercial trend and the drag that approach how i view it is the campaign is a dragnet approach to send a frigate out there, see if there's any interesting to come along and the ones they don't really know about in case they can find something down the road. instead of moving what has worked out a little bit better is the fbi focused counterterrorism investigations with help from others, and the
second one, you know, don't agree most of these agencies operate in any way or manner the operate under the rules passed by the way is the renditions are all signed off on by the council at the cia and the conspiracy theory because the government in general [inaudible] to sort of complete. so soft power especially when it comes to counterterrorism the military again is the big player there and they are not equipped
to train the institutions that are the state department which is completely atrophied into the context agency they are under resource to and there is no hope in the future i don't think to get any better because there is no constituency in congress and of little of it with in the united states unfortunately. >> i appreciate your energy and reporting, and i wanted to ask about your position as a free lancer. i encountered some crimes by the u.s. army and i presented it goes to producers of the major networks all of them said to me, you know, this is important, we have no doubt this is true. we are not going to run this story. one of them put it to me very
bluntly. he said look, we are not michael hastings. we have a relationship with the top officials at the pentagon revealing these crimes that damage that relationship michael can, support and we can't do that. >> the question is do you believe that that's true? >> well, i think -- thanks for your kind words and i get the nation on my kindle all the time, so whatever store you have, give me an e-mail and we will talk to the agent at new york stone. [laughter] i think in my view they've been doing great stuff with him dickinson and i can list of and
one of the functions is to not have to worry about things like that, like we are able to go there because we don't have a table of the white house correspondents' dinner, but i think also one of the things is i talked to people that the pentagon all the time, and they talk to me, not sometimes because they want to, not because they like me or liked my socks. [laughter] the talk to me because they know that it's in their interest to say that hastings got a better respond to the e-mail even if it is just to go have a nice day. so i think my experience has been you can do these stories and it's not -- its has many benefits and drawbacks. >> we have time for one or two
more. >> do you believe they are responsible for the public a government or personal interest when investigating and what are the risks that journalism face, to anybody -- were the risks in taking when you are dealing stores? >> this covers the second one pretty much. >> the first question again? >> when your report and investigate is it to the government or your personal interest? >> following -- >> when you investigate on your stories. is it chiefly you believe that
it's for the public, for the government, or because you're interested in investigating the story? >> the story is that compel me but i feel like are worth working with my team and my colleagues going after four years to get. its story is that i think matter that are going to pull to have some impact in the world, and that is why i want to do them. and occasionally they end up being liked aliens in space, no one can hear you scream and no one cares about your story but it's great when they do and that's why i want to do that. it's for the broad public. >> when you were doing all these -- it was all about trying to make a difference. it's not that that many people get out but to like to have the
power to really make a difference for good. and, you know, and present being editor i can pick out whatever. i know where the problem is quite often i know the story before you even start investigating it, and i know what the outcome is going to be. and you just pick one and for the same reason, the one that excites you the most and the one you will have the greatest impact and will make the biggest difference, and the other thing you have to always after you do all that you figured out okay, would bring you down, it's never brought us down. it's just a great feeling. you know, when you can do something and, you know, the thing i always love is when i
finished the story, the greatest conflict you could tell me if i didn't agree with you but you know, i didn't know that. >> last question. [applause] >> i apologize. this is also for mr. hastings. you mentioned earlier that this story exposes the contempt for civilians in of the military. well, isn't that a bit redundant in the sense that the new wage a war it already has contempt for the civilians? >> that's rhetorical, but the second part of the question is do you get the sense covering the war in afghanistan and the war in iraq and how these guys are dragging their feet when people call for a deadline to
end this and you mentioned they are still continuing the raid and the strikes do you think there is a sense they want the public and america and the public and these occupied countries to get used to the idea? >> in terms of the sort of -- the question is what is it me to kind of be at work for the decade and then reasoned, the recent exclusion and libya as well, and i think whether it is intentional or not i think it's clear that the -- we as the public and me as a human being and journalist we get immune to what happens to the civilians especially when it happens in other countries, so i don't know if that is the intent but it's certainly the consequence.
one of the sort of weird ironies is -- rolling stone did a story last week which had a really terrific photos about this unit of american soldiers that had gone out and killed civilians and set them up and it's really terrific stuff. and it's about 48 hours. but it's really one of the issues i agree with the security fence along the rumsfeld who said just yesterday the sticker to the two-story shouldn't be much bigger than that would be great and why wasn't it? and you know, something is screwed up when rumsfeld is also leading rolling stone. [laughter] but, i am interested to hear the other panelists have to say and how they've gotten desensitized to some of this news. ..
a person in the walter reed case the stars above that conditions so people know how to respond. when you're talking about large things like the war it's very difficult to respond. the guillotine i think what thak is his readers fatigue and you always face it as a journalistao and first you're going to do one more story about what, do know,i and that's why we don't have i hink a lack of imaginationty about poverty economic downturn and what it did to people. our editors wanted those stories, on the other hand what they didn't want and i don't think you want either is a story you read the first paragraph and
you know what the story is going to say. i'm not saying that's what all stories are like, but i think that makes a case for the new platforms that we have at our fink l tips that are still -- fingertips but not used to the full extent because you can use the written word with video and make something all the more powerful and seem new, and, it is new for those involved. >> one more question, please. i'm pushing -- >> go for it. [laughter] >> well, in my opinion, the two items to print is the interpret. it relies heavily on ads, do your investigative reports conflict with sponsors?
>> we had an interesting case in top secret america. first of all, no, they don't. we're sprit. you know, if there's someone in the advertising department who doesn't -- they never discuss anything with the newsroom about what they should or shouldn't be doing because it might lose or gain ads. in fact, they make a point if there's a story about, you know, a car -- like, there's a story that criticizes or glorifies something, they will not put an ad that is in the related field next to it, and the same thing happened with top secret america. they decided on the website they would have no ads for the first month i think it was just to, i don't know, in readers' minds sometimes we don't do a good job explaning ourselves and those things and the editorial page is not the front of the news page. it's church and state, we don't talk to each other, they
family and former staff members of senator ted kennedy recently gathered in boston's neighborhood for the ground breaking of the edward m. kennedy institute. the event includes tributes to the late senator bayh massachusetts governor deval patrick, massachusetts congressman ed markey and former longtime kennedy aide paul kirk. kennedy institute president peter meade begins the program. >> good morning, ladies and b gentlemen, thank you very much y for being here. ol really do appreciate it. f if we could begin to have folksr take their seats we will have time for pictures of littledown, later. billpl delahunt, could you sit down please? thank you. [laughter] lieutenant governor is about to take his seat by the treasurer there. we're making real progress here. good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and in so many ways is the khoir was saying just a
bit ago, this is the day the lord has made. let us rejoice and be glad. [applause] i was just telling vicky i was walking earlier and looked up at the incredible blue sky with the sunshining down, and i said something that so many of us said so many times in our lives, thank you, ted. well, people will take credit for much of what happens, we give him the responsibility and credit for this beautiful day, and it's so typical of what ted kennedy wanted. it's not about ted in so many different ways, but it's about the future, and it's about teaching people how our government works, and it's about giving young people a sense of purpose and hope. one day eddy and i were talking about what this place is, and eddy said, you know, for kids
like you and me, if we came to the institute, we'd never go home, and if you haven't had a chance yet to look at what the place will look like, there's reppedderringings -- renderings outside the tent to the left and there's a model. if you haven't already, take the time to look at the model. at the core of what we have is a representation of the u.s. senate and the hundred seats and desks there will come alive for young people and everybody in this tent helped to make that happen. i want to thank you so much. couple of notes here for you. the institute is an important part of umass boston, and when you join umass boston, you become part of a family, and the folks at umass boston could not have been kinder or more effective in making this work,
and so for all the people who are here who work were umass boston, from the baht father or mother of -- bottom of our hearts, thank you so much for what you did and what you do. [applause] by the way, when you look at the model and the renderings, one of the things you have to think about that kennedy would be so thrilled with is the building will be built entirely with union labor. [applause] we would have had a rainy day if we were not doing that. ted would have -- i think that's true. a couple people i'd like to acknowledge as we begin this morning. two of the founding mothers of the board -- members of the board of the directors, senator pall kirk and dave burke no longer on the
board but deserve so much credit for what we do. [applause] our architect who, and as you look at the building, you'll see what he did. he was able to take the notion as vicky and ted talked to historians about what this could be, and fit it into the campus here at umass, and it looks like it's part of the facility that i am paid to design so many decades ago. our architectture is a dear friend. [applause] you know, for those of us who follow what's in washington, and it would be hard not to do that this week, for anybody who came to be with us today, it's an extraordinary venture, and as you may know, those folks will have to go back. we're blessed to have speaker
pelosi with us this morning. [applause] [cheers and applause] i did mention former congressman bill who has been such a supporter of the institute and his colleague former congressman from massachusetts, the lieutenant governor is here as well as our state treasurer, and you'll hear from some of the other elected officials who are here. thank you so much for being a part of this. i mentioned last night that joe biden described the secret of ted kennedy's success, and it was always about doing things for others, and the institute is that, a way to do things for the people of this country and in particular for young people, so when you leave here today,
please take a look at the model, please walk with the sense of purpose of what the institute is. it is what senator kennedy wanted it to be, an institute to teach people about our government, and in particular to have young people become incredibly excited about the united states of america and how we work, and a woman who does that every day, day in and day out, an incredible supporter of the institute, the son of president from massachusetts, terry murray. [applause] >> good morning, and welcome on this absolutely beautiful day. i have a resolution from the senate, but there is a resolution also here from the
house of representatives. congratlating the institute for the united states senate on its historic groundbreaking whereas the kennedy m. institute breaks ground on a state of the art for a minute on friday, april 8, 2011 and the institute was conceived by the late senator as an institution designed to educate students of all ages about american democracy and to inspire future generations to engage in the public square and whereas the institute as far as to preserve the united states senate's past e lym nate -- illuminate its present and lead into the future and ted kennedy in decades of service to the commonwealth and country provided dedicated leadership on major issues beginning with his maiden speech in the united states senate in support of the civil rights act of 1964, and whereas the institute has honored senator kennedy's
legendary commitment to public education by forming a partnership with the university of massachusetts boston that will benefit each institution for decades to come and whereas the new beautiful institute accommodates the library and attracts thousands of visitors annually to the columbia point in the city of boston -- thank you, therefore, be it resolved that the massachusetts senate hereby congratulates the senator ted m. cede di institute of the united states senate on its historic groundbreaking and this transmitted by the clerk of the senate to the institute for the united states senate and signed by all body massachusetts senators. [applause]
>> i want to apologize to the attorney general who is here with us. [applause] when something like this happens, so many people get to take vows. the staff of the edward kennedy institute has done an incredible job of getting things ready today. i want to mention paul remmy, chris cole, chris mccarthy, and the person who pulled things all together, lisa mcburney, thanks to all of you for the work you've done. [applause] a dear friend of the senators and everybody in the room, a man who makes things happen at the
house, the speaker of the house. >> thank you very much, peter, and not a big day is opening day by the way, let's not forget that, and the red sox are starting a winning streak today as a matter of fact. [applause] the last prediction was that peter meade was going to retire. so much for my predictions. [laughter] thank you, peter, for that kind introduction, and it's a pleasure for me to join with my colleague in the senate and to join with you today to bring the greetings and best wishes for the massachusetts house of representatives. today we celebrate the enduring commitment to public service of
our beloved senator, edward m. kennedy, a leader without equal, not only here in massachusetts, but across this nation i'd like to extend my appreciation to all those whose hard work and dedication has made this day a reality. like all of you, i am anxiously awaiting the opening of the edward m. kennedy institute of the united states senate to help bring alive america's great history and inspire young people to serve the greater good just as ted kennedy did with such devotion for so many years. it's be fitting that this beautiful new facility will be located next to the john f. kennedy presidential library which for 30 years has helped
define the boston water front. i can't think of a better place to showcase the lasting impact of the two senator kennedys from massachusetts in the entire kennedy family for that matter on the civic life of the nation. i'm really happy to be here today to celebrate the new beginning because ted kennedy's focus was always on the future. he'd never stop fighting for a better tomorrow, for the people of massachusetts, and the united states. he never stopped searching for ways to build a more perfect union for all the the american people, and as we confront today's challenges, this institute will keep senator kennedy's vision and ideals alive for the people of massachusetts and the united states. congratulations and god bless all of you. thank you very much.
[applause] >> you know, the speaker mentioned the jfk library, and mentioned to paul kirk one time, i've never gone in that building without being inspired. i think the same will be true of the institute we're about to build, and one of the things you need to know, i mentioned one of the neighbors of umass boston, the folks at the kennedy library from the beginning whether it's events we've done at the library or helping with any suggestions as we begin on how we make things work, and i want to publicly thank our friends at the jfk library for the great work they have done with us. [applause] so many people who are callings of ted kennedy always talked about you can trust his word, you knew -- he knew how to do all the work of the senate, and the person there through most of that
career with him, a fellow from connecticut represented in the connecticut senate by my sister io legal, a man who that been an incredible friend, a force for safety in banking for this country when it was nod easy to do, chris dodd from connecticut. [applause] years ago, vicky and ted had a number of us at the house on the cape and talking about the institute and what it could be and wop of the suggestions was that it could go to another college, and it wasn't emerson college. [laughter] and the senator said he wanted it at umass boston, and he was clear about that. he understood how important it would be for himself, for the people at umass boston. we have a great university system in massachusetts, and the man who was led it for the last
several years has been a member of our board, a sit leader in massachusetts, and a dear friend of the kennedy institute, chad wilson. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much, peter. this really is a wonderful day for the university, and it's a wonderful day for our commonwealth and for the nation, for everyone who cares about public service, this is a wonderful day, and it was why the red sox were waiting to kick off their season until this could happen. we know that. [laughter] the university of massachusetts has been an inthews yays tick partner in the effort because we believe this institute for the united states senate will be a dynamic force for generations to come. it's a place where students come to lerp about the senate and about our american democracy. it's a place where scholars explore the issues of our time and help us child support --
chart a course for the future and it's a place where citizens come to reflect on our american experience and to find inspiration. public service is the idea that drove the senator. his deal to serve illuminated his life, and public service is what senator kennedy reppedderred to massachusetts and to this -- rendered this massachusetts and this nation in sing giew lar fashion. we'll capture the service that senator kennedy and others provided in the past and hopefully fan the flame of service for generations to come, and i want to thank vicki kennedy for her friendship, wisdom, dedication to the project. senator kennedy's voice sounded the call for so many, and vicky's voice, well, a little bit quieter is no less inspirational or persuasive. we wouldn't have made it here without you. senator kennedy left
massachusetts so many gifts and certainly one of those great gifts is our friend and colleague, vicky kennedy. [applause] [applause] also i want to acknowledge all of my colleagues from the university of massachusetts with us today. i'll note a few of them, sorry i can't name them all, but i want to point out that jim, chairman of the board of trustees in his second term as chairman who also has a clear passion for public service, and david mckinsey who building directer has been involved with this project and will continue to be as we build the building. by the way, david is also the former interim chancellor of umass boston and by the way, the interim chancellor of umass law and he too has a life of service.
bob is here -- [applause] oh, there's fans in the audience. [laughter] he's got fans ever where. he flies that blimp across the stadium. is it flying today? the fbi? he's chairman of the umass building authority charged with building the building and later this month honored for a lifetime of service, but particularly also let me thank my friend, chancellor keith for all he does for boston and this institution because you have to do a lot to get here. [applause] [applause] thanks to my colleagues on the edward m. kennedy institute board all of whom care so much and woshed so hard to make this day a reality. last, i want to thank the man who made it all possible, senator kennedy, for the confidence and the vision that he displayed in forging this partnership with the university of massachusetts and for understanding the natural
connection between a university established to serve the people and his own mission of service to all. we're very honored by that decision, and we'll always work to drive towards his shining legacy. thank you very much. [applause] i do think that folks in the room know so much about the kennedy family and what it has done and the excellence in pursuit of public service, but few may know that kara kennedy is on the institute board, worked in television, and oftentimes people say things like a labor of love. this is not a labor of love. this is an act of love in the work that she's done for her dad. kara, would you join us at the
podium? [applause] [applause] >> thank you, all. thank you so much for everybody coming here especially all those former staffers of dad's. i also would like to thank my kids, grace and max, who took off from school for two days and now have extra home work to prepare for on monday. [laughter] i'm here to introduce this film that my best friend of 38 years and i were fortunate enough to make and so without further adieu, we'll show the film, okay? thank you. ♪ ♪
made the senate come alive like he did. he loved his history and his taste of our american story. there's no greater tribute we can over. it's a living institute where students, the teachers, and the public can come together and learn about the role of the senate he loved so much. >> it will be a dynamic center of learning and engagement taking advantage of the 21st century technology and have an experience that literally will bring history alive. the centerpiece of the building will be a large theater that can be arranged to recreate the floor of the united states senate. either the current senate chamber or the old chamber where
they met from 1810 to 1859. all the desks will be interactive. the history of who sat at that desk and almost limitless amounts of information will be at your fingertips. the hallways and the walls outside the chamber will have interactive faces as well, and visitor will be able to sit up in a gallery that will overlook the activities on the senate floor. there will be classrooms circling the perimeter of the building for further study, documents and information will be digitized and readily available and can be sorted according to the user's prerch. our goal is to provide each visitor with an insight into the workings of their government that they couldn't get anywhere else. imagine going into to the theater, refiguring it as the
old senate chamber and actually becoming one of those senators, henry clay, daniel wester and the others. you would study their positions, negotiate, argue, debate. teddy said there was no more perfect partner for the edward m. kennedy institute than the umass boston, and he loved this location. here on columbia point next to his brother's library overlooking dorchester bay. my husband's dream was that by immersing yourself in history, reliving the great debates of our time, you would be reminded of the great problems we tackled and great things we achieved when we all came to the table, and you would be inspired to be involved too. >> it is now, especially now, that we need to get people interested in our public
problems, and we ignite the faith in our public institutions. great americans together can forge consensus and understand not just the united states senate role in our government, but their role in it as well. >> what we're doing there is going to be something unlike anything anywhere in the world. we're going to bring history alive. mr. reid of rhode island. ♪ ♪ [cheers and applause] ♪ [applause] ♪ >> mr. kennedy. [cheers and applause]
♪ ♪ [applause] >> thanks, kara, and thanks for the tears and all that. thank you. would you please stand again? [applause] like all of us blessed ton parents, the senator was proud of all of his children, and i think in a special way, ka rrk a, he is particularly proud of you for what you have done. thank you so much. [applause] i mentioned eddy before, and we traveled to israel one time shortly after the invasion of
kuwait, and part of what we did in the trip is we met with a group of people from the plo, and they were supporting saddam's invasion of kuwait. it was the kind of thing where generally people are polite and ask a few polite questions and the world was pregnant with worry and what might happen in the middle east, and eddy looked at the folks and said you will be better to your children and your grandchildren. you will have to explain to them how you made mistake after mistake and never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. i get two reactions. i couldn't believe the boldness of this guy, and i was trying to figure out if we could keep our backs to the wall as we were leaving the room. [laughter] i was impressed with his candor and leadership, and it's a
hallmark of him whether we're in the middle east or here in his district or in the halls of congress, a man who stands up for what he believes in and does it all the time, a greater friend of the institute we don't have than our friend ed markey. [applause] [applause] >> thank you, peter, so much, and thank you for being the great leader for the institute in its first year of existence and thank you vicky for being an inspiration to all of us. you have vision. you asked us all to help and today is the tribute to you that you give to ted, and we all honor you for this vision and commitment which you had and to
ted and to kara and to patrick, the likes of his life and you and the whole family, it is our honor to be with you here today. we are so proud of you, and we are so proud to be here with the whole family here today. thank you. [applause] you know, throughout the entire health care debate, we are here today with along with tip o'neill, the greatest speaker of the house in the history of the united states, nancy pelosi, who made sure that health care and the vision of ted kennedy which she mentioned every day in the democratic caucus for two years came to be a reality for all americans. [applause] [applause]