in terms of what prime minister -- prime minister netanyahu said yesterday, we have our policy. this is, of course, we are involved in negotiations now and we will have to see how things go forward in this negotiation. but our goal remains the same: a two state solution, the two states living side by side in security and prosperity. >> so you have your policy -- the israeli government has is some policy and you were saying that in the near future there is no hope of perhaps a line in those two policies? >> we are going to sit down i hope soon and with all the difference stakeholders and workout dissolution but i'm not just going to -- i'm not going to characterize the prime minister situation in terms of -- i'm not expressing this right. >> we are going to have -- is going to be a complicated negotiation. and in the prime minister netanyahu has laid out his point of view as he sees it as the head of the israeli government. we have seen the reaction of various palestinian officials and leaders. and we just want to reiterate that is in the interests of everyone in the region to co

it welcomed the fact that prime minister netanyahu made an important step. we're committed to two states living side by side in their historic homeland. we believe the solution can and must insure both israel's security and the film of the palestinians' legitimate aspirations for a viable state. we welcome his endorsement of his book. >> with all the conditions, can there be a viable solution? it has to be demilitarized, airspace? >> our policy is clear on this. we want the conditions and the roadmap fulfilled. we want israel's security to be insured. we want the palestinians to have their own homeland. in terms of what prime minister netanyahu said yesterday, we have our policy. we are involved in and negotiation now and we will see how things go forward in this negotiation. our goal remains the same. two state solution. the two states living side-by- side in security and prosperity. >> the israeli government has its own policy. in the near future -- in the near future, is there a chance? >> we're going to sit down, i hope soon, with all the different stake

i have already met with prime minister netanyahu. our governments are in close contact with how we can move forward on some of the items that might be inhibiting restarting talks. you have probably seen more sustained activity on this issue in the first five months than you would have seen in most previous administrations. the reason we are doing that is because not only have talks ground to a halt, but there was a sense that all sides were getting so dug in and so cynical that you might reach a point where you could never get the parties back at the table. i think given what we've done so far, we've at least created the space, the atmosphere, in which talks can restart. now, i just have to say one more time, the united states can't solve this problem. the united states can be a partner in solving the problem, but ultimately the parties involved are going to have to make a decision that the prosperity and security of their people is best served by norks -- negotiations and compromise. and we can't force them to make those difficult d

i am glad that the prime minister netanyahu made the speech. united states will continue to be as honest as possible to all sides in this dispute. it is in everybody's interest to move in a new direction. i think it can be accomplished. it will require a lot of work and a partnership with key countries like italy to help parties come together. >> [speaking italian] [inaudible] -- [unintelligible] >> you discussed during the meeting the economic crisis. the measures you are discussing right now, will this be discussed at the next g-8 in g- 20 meeting? >> our respective prime ministers have been meeting diligently. they have put forward a framework that will be discussed and hopefully ratified at the g-8 meeting. that will provide a broad consensus. the united states is putting forth a very specific regulatory reform that will make sure that we do not find ourselves in this position again. it improves oversight, ensures that banks are not taking risks with highly leveraged money that can result in systemic collapse , and that consumers and invest

host: the comments of benjamin netanyahu on "meet the press." st. petersburg, florida. thomas on the independent line. caller: anti-terrorist training material currently being used by the department of defense teaches its personnel that free expression in the form of public protest should be regarded as low level terrorism. this is what the part of the -- defense, which is suppose protect our civil rights, is teaching its personnel that people who question authority should be regarded as low-level terrorists. host: the story on some of the former guantanamo detaineess. bermuda premier faces scrutiny, the decision to accept former guantanamo prisoners fuels' debate about bill leader's motives. bermuda's top elected officials survived a vote of no-confidence after a 14-hour parliamentary debate here over the weekend. prime minister ewart brown remains focus of a fiery public debate over the motives that led him to accept for freed prisoners from the u.s. detention facility in guantanamo bay, cuba. mr. brown said the decision was the right thing to do and he was happy to h

i think the house will also want to know the future prime minister netanyahu or for the first time he endorsed a to a state solution, and a born step toward but there remains a long road ahead of us. i am speaking to him later today to president importance of freezing settlements. so mr. speaker, with the last british troops about to return home now is the right time to ensure we have a proper process in place to learn the lessons of this complex and often controversial events of the last six years. i am announcing the establishment of an independent peer counselor committee of inquiry that will consider the time from summer 2001, the military operations in march 2003 and subsequent involvement in iraq right until the end of july this year. the inquiry is essential so that by learning lessons we will strengthen the health of our democracy, diplomacy and military. it will i stress be fully independent of government, the scope of the inquiry is unprecedented and covers an eight year time including the run-up to the conflict and the full time of conflict and reconstruction. the committee

. >> tonight on c-span, remarks from israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu on establishing a palestinian state. and former house speaker newt gingrich at the annual g.o.p. fundraising dinner. later on "q&a" larry arnn, not accepting state and federal funding. >> tomorrow on c-span 3 a look at efforts to prevent polio around the world and a look at efforts in developing vaccines. the world health organization is the host of this event and you can see it live at 1:30 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> how is c-span funded? >> i have no clue. >> maybe some government grants. >> i would say donations. >> advertising for products. >> public money, i'm sure. >> by taxes. >> how is c-span funded? 30 years ago america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. as a private business initiative, no government mandate, no government money. >> now israeli prime minister netanyahu calls on palestinian leaders to prestart peace negotiations without preconditions. he made the call on sunday during a major policy speech. he also said palestinians must recognize israel as a jewish state. this is abo

netanyahu said, yes, we need answers about the conduct of those iranian elections. but want to focus light weapons on the inquiry announced by the prime minister. we welcome the inquiry -- indeed, we have been calling for now for many, many months. but i have to say i'm far from convinced the promise there has got it right. the whole point of having an inquiry is it got to be able to make clear recommendations to go wherever the evidence needs, to establish the full truth and to make sure the right lessons are learned. it has got to do so in a way that builds public confidence. isn't there a danger that what the prime tester has announced today will not achieve those objections? the membership looks quite limited, the terms of reference in restricted and inquiry is not specifically tasked to make recommendations and none of it will be held in public. so, will the prime minister answer questions about the following fou arear? timing, membership, covered and content and the openness? first, timing, this inquiry should have started earlier. can anyone argue an inquiry

i think prime minister netanyahu in recognizing the aspirations of the palestinians for a state of their own in his speech said something that many people were waiting to hear him say. >> [inaudible] >> on iran, the iranians -- can you bring as up-to-date of the protests? there have been reports of criticisms about u.s. interference in iranian affairs. can you comment on that? does the outcome of the iranian alexian change israel's position in any way and will your discussion -- outcome of the iranian election change israel's position in any way? >> the united states believes strongly in the basic principle -- principle of free expression. we believe that it is a fundamental human right for people to be able to communicate and express their opinions and take positions. this goes back to the founding of our country. we stand firmly behind it. we promote the right for free expression. it is the case that one of the means of expression, the use of torture -- twitter is an important one. apparently it is very important to especially to young people. keeping those lines of communications open

and one more story on that, palestinian officials are dismissing a proposal from prime minister netanyahu, calling for a palestinian state. this happened yesterday. >> here is the substance that i now state clearly. if we received this guarantee regarding the militarized nation and israel's security needs, and if palestinians recognize israel as a state of the jewish people, we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized palestinian state exists alongside the jewish state. host: back to the issue of health care. tom daschle is controlling the cost of mel practice the insurance will have to be part of the overhaul of health care. another 15 minutes of your thoughts on taxing health care benefits as the ama gets ready to hear from the president today. caller: a lot of people here are not looking at results. what is the result of single payer health care? eventually, there will be rationing. the solution is what the person from michigan said. the government does not need to control, allowing people to pull together -- pool together to negotiate. that w

the interpretation by the author is that the mossad is coming out and removing a key reason that the netanyahu government could use for an early attack as well as for the argument to the obama administration that we cannot do palestine first because iran is a more urgent program. this is an interesting comment by the mossad, not normally known for engaging in international politics. an interesting development to keep your eye on. other questions? yes? >> i have a question -- i am the independent editor for women, inc. maybe you could answer this -- how much of validity did you give to the rumors of the involvement of the grand ayatollah with systematically -- who was systematically against the theocratic state? >> i am engaging in rumors, too. let's be very clear. you know the idea cholecystotomy has many offices -- you know the ayatollah sistani has many offices, very influential and iraq and iran. his grandson or granddaughter is now married to another leaders daughter or son. these ayatollah's grandchildren have close family relations. like many other members of the clergy, it is considered

i was embarrassed to watch his press conference with the great war hero benjamin netanyahu who has helped keep his country safe for many years. obama sat there with complete arrogance that he is now the new american power, able to dictate what he thinks is best for israel. so how worried are we supposed to be now? was i hearing things when he said that iran might have the right to nuclear power? are we supposed to be sitting and waiting, watching for the possibility of a new holocaust? who's going to take the responsibility to keep israel safe? i'll tell you why this really scares the hell out of me, because everything obama has recommended has turned out to be disastrous. this so-called stimulus package and his budget will leave our grandchildren with great burdens and great debts. the government is now owning car companies and banks. and we're losing job after job. our unemployment rate is in an astro nom mick 9.4, and of course, they send out joe biden, one of the great double talkers of our time to tell us the unemployment rate is getting better. the government wants to run health car

speeches from netanyahu and all of that. it is a dynamic time. guest: i agree. every president's only responsibility is to american interests. the question is what is in our interest. if every president things that they have a responsibility beyond our interest, that is a constitutional error. host: the president, in a "parade magazine

. >> now, the israeli prime minister, benjamin and not -- benjamin netanyahu called on palestinian leaders to restart peace negotiations without preconditions. he made this call during a major policy speech and said palestinians must recognize israel as a jewish state. this is 30 minutes. [applause] >> honored guests, citizens of the state of israel, peace has always been the desire of our nation. our prophets gave the world the vision of peace, we greet one another with wishes of peace and our prayers conclude with the word peace. we are gathered here this evening in an institution named for two pioneers of peace, menachem begin and anwar sadat. we share in their vision. 2 1/2 months ago, i took the oath of office as prime minister of israel. i pledged to establish a national unity government and i did. i believed and i still believe that unity was essential for us now more than ever as we face three immense challenges. the iranian threat, the economic crisis, and the advancement of peace. the iranian threat looms large before us as we learned yesterday in full force. the greatest danger

an israeli prime investor benjamin netanyahu says israel will accept the palestinian state if palestinians demilitarize and recognize israel's right to exist. he spoke this past weekend at the university near tel levied for about 30 minutes. -- tel aviv. >> honored guests, citizens of the state of israel. peace has always been our people's most ardent desire. our prophets gave the world the vision of peace, we greet one another with wishes of peace, and our prayers conclude with the word peace. we are gathered this evening in an institution named for two pioneers of peace, menachem begin and anwar sadat, and we share in their vision. two and half months ago, i took the oath of office as the prime minister of israel. i pledged to establish a national unity government - and i did. i believed and i still believe that unity was essential for us now more than ever as we face three immense challenges - the iranian threat, the economic crisis, and the advancement of peace. the iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday. the greatest danger confronting israel, the

speeches from netanyahu and all of that. it is a dynamic time. guest: i agree. every president's only responsibility is to american interests. the question is what is in our interest. if every president things that they have a responsibility beyond our interest, that is a constitutional error. host: the president, in a "parade magazine." america's most red. standing with his daughters. guest: i got that alert. they went and had ice cream. i called my colleagues in london and said that the president could be coming out with a major statement. steven and i waited for that call. we are very attentive. well, they went out and had ice- cream. . guest: he is overexpose according to the principles of white house press, but perhaps he has figured out something the previous administrations did not. i still think he is in danger of it. every time the president has to take a stand publicly he antagonizes some one. you would rather send out something other than the president if the white house has to send out a story. the president risks taking the brunt of being out there.

. >> netanyahu has succeeded in delaying -- >> i am not sure i necessarily agree there. >> there is an accommodation being worked out with the u.s.. is it the possibility is that the responsibility of the u.s. to facilitate an accommodation -- is it the responsibility of the u.s. to facilitate an accommodation? >> as george mitchell said, we want to get back into formal negotiations. we are working harder in a decree the conditions that will allow that to happen. we recognize that positions held today and those held by the palestinians today may be at odds. all we're asking israel to do and the palestinians to do is to live up to the obligations that they themselves have committed to. >> there was a report today that said secretary clinton would like a stronger stand. this administration should be coming out more strongly in favor of their activities. >> i do not think there is any daylight between the position of the daylighpresident and the pon of the secretary. >> does she think they should be putting more public support? >> clearly, we are watching what is unfolding here. this is n

remarks from the israeli prime minister netanyahu on the palestinian state. newt gingrich at the 2009 annual congressional gop fund-raising dinner. that is later. tomorrow on "washington journal" a look at the fiscal policy with bruce stokes. and phil mattingly will also be speaking. secure flight is a new program that will be discussed after that. that is with a former tsa administrator. that is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> let me be clear mr. speaker about what we think of electoral reform. we want to keep the existing system. we support the link between

then remarks from benjamin netanyahu on establishing a palestinian state. later, former house speaker newt gingrich at the 2009 annual congressional gop fund-raising dinner. >> tomorrow on "washington journal," and look at the fiscal policy with bruce stokes. then a discussion on financial markets and institutions with bill mattingly. later, a look at the new program secured flight, which checks passengers names against the terrorist watch list. "washington journal," live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> let me be clear, mr. speaker, about what we think of electoral reform. we want to keep the existing system. we support the link between one mp and one constituency and we back our system because you can throw out we, tart, and is credited governments.

speeches from netanyahu and all of that. it is a dynamic time. guest: i agree. every president's only responsibility is to american interests. the question is what is in our interest. if every president things that they have a responsibility beyond our interest, that is a constitutional error. host: the president, in a "parade magazine." america's most red. standing with his daughters. guest: i got that alert. they went and had ice cream. i called my colleagues in london and said that the president could be coming out with a major statement. steven and i waited for that call. we are very attentive. well, they went out and had ice- cream. . i don't know whether he worries about. to all of us who have been in communication responsibilities, we have been discussing it since the beginning of the administration. according to what we thought or the principles of white house communication, he is overexposed. on the upper hand, he may have figured out something that the reagan people and the clinton people did not figure out. i still think that he is in danger of it. it

and i thaought prime minister netanyahu, in recognizing the aspirations of the palestinians for a state of their own in his speech on sunday night, said something that many people were waiting to hear him say. >> madame secretary, on iran and also for the foreign minister, the iranians have protested u.s. actions through the swiss ambassador today. could you bring us up to date on them. and there have been reports of criticisms about u.s. interference in iranian affairs because of the call to twitter. if you could comment on that. and, for the fortune minister, does the outcome of the iranian election change israel's position in any way? and were your discussions today, did they touch on that and any actions you asked the administration to do? >> that is four questions. we have very creative reporters on both sides here. the united states believes passionately and strongly in the basic principle of free expression. we believe that it is a fundamental human right for people to be able to communicate, to express their opinions, to take positions, and this is a view that goes back to the f

i mentioned some of the other issues that i discussed with prime minister netanyahu. for example, increasing freedom of movement within the west bank. dealing with the humanitarian crisis in the gaza and allowing reconstruction to proceed more aggressively. what has been interesting is that less attention has been focused on the insistence on my part that the palestinians and arab states have to take a very concrete actions. when it comes to the palestinians, we know what they are supposed to be doing. they have to continue to make progress on security in the west bank. they have to deal with incitement issues. there is still a tendency, even within palestinians who say they are interested in peace with israel, to engage in statements that in sight a hatred of israel or are not constructive to the pri's process. to his credit, president -- or are not constructed to the peace process. president abbas has made progress but not enough. we still have not seen a firm commitment from the palestinian authority that they can control some of the border areas that israel will b

and then british prime minister gordon brown and after that benjamin netanyahu and his speech on a proposal for peace in the middle east. ♪ . . >> dr. larry arnn, president of hillsdale college. that we read the first three sentences of the with the pda site for your school. let's stop there. is that right? >> is an old college. it is 165 years old now. the reason is a bastion and fortress and citadel of conservatism is, is very stiff and stern about its old document. we stick by that. that is conservatism in a way, but what that document says, it repeats in different words some of the principals in the declaration of independence. that conservatism is tied to the liberalism of the american founders. >> what about this refusal of government funding? >> that is a modern phenomenon. the government funding of college, direct aid to college and the students is the late 1950's or early 1960's thing that has grown rapidly since then. it has sparked -- it was sparked in part by that sputnik soviet launch. that was the public statement about why they did it, to help us get to the moon. we did not

the atlantic magazine, american magazine they put on the web site right away that headline was this: netanyahu to obama, stop iran or i will. [applause] he warned of the dangers of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of apocalyptic cult leaders, leaders of iran. what did he mean? why did he say this? he said it because the current leaders of iran believe that the end of the world is near. this is what they are saying publicly. in the book, inside the revolution, i walk through these quotes from their books, from their speeches come from their web sites, from their videos so you hear in their own words and of course when the film comes out we will be doing the same thing. so you hear what they are saying. they are seeing the end of the world is at hand. the leaders of iran, not the iranian people, you have to make that distinction, but the leaders of iran, mahmoud ahmadinejad, president -- i want you to say that five times quickly with me -- i'm just kidding. i want you to call him mahmoud-genocide. [laughter] there will be no spelling tests. these men and they have surrounded themselves bel

cairo the white house confirmed that president obama had a 20-minute conversation with prime minister netanyahu in tel aviv. and either sunday in jews lum -- jerusalem or monday he's expected to deliver his own response to the president's remarks in die -- cairo. what will we hear? guest: it was interesting. to us it generated big in america about our relations with the muslim world. but it generated an important debate in israel. about the syrians -- seriousness of the president brkts new american policy, about the peace initiative about the priority of the white house. and therefore the prime minister of israel under pressure from his own people to put something on table to respond. if you look at the israeli debate, you know, in the press and among politicians, the prime minister was under pressure to produce some gesture, some peace plan because the obama

now israeli prime minister netanyahu, palestinian leaders to start peace negotiations without peace preconditions. he made the speech sunday. this is about 30 minutes. [applause] inutes. [applause] >> honored guests, citizens of

worked as a communications strategist for rush limbaugh, steve forbes, a ton sharansky in benjamin netanyahu. he is the author of a bestselling novel, the last jihad, the last days in the ezekiel option. for more information about joel rosenberg visit joel rosenberg.com. >> i had no desire to do it and that was the condition in which i agree to take this on. >> coming up next booktv presents after words, an hourlong program where we invite guest host to interview authors. this week, nevada elementary school teacher tierney cahill discusses her book, "ms. cahill for congress" one fearless teacher, her sixth-grade class, and the election that changed their lives forever on a dare from our sixth grade students. with only $7,000 in a campaign

absolutely agree about the need for a two-stage solution between israel and palestine and welcome what netanyahu has said it and, yes, we need answers about conduct of those i read in the elections but i want to focus my questions on the inquiry and by the prime minister. we welcome an inquiry and have been calling for in now for many months but i have to say i am far from convinced that the prime minister has got right. the whole point of having an inquiry is it's got to be able to make clear recommendations to go wherever the evidence leads to establish the full truth and make sure the right lessons are learned and got to do so anyway that builds public confidence. isn't there a danger that while the prime minister has announced want to achieve those objectives and the membership looks quite limited and other terms of reference in restricted and the inquiry is a specifically task to make recommendations and none of it will be held in public so will the prime minister to answer questions about the following four areas -- the timing, the membership, the coverage and content and the openness. fir

and my final point is there are two commandos at the top, you know, prime minister netanyahu and barack, and commandos tend to be very bold. >> from the israeli perspective looking at the outcome of the election, do you think that increased -- what does that do, does that make an attack more or less likely? >> yeah, that's a tough question. i would say -- >> that's why i asked. [laughter] >> i would say probably more likely because it's going to become more clear faster that the diplomacy isn't going forward. >> right. so most importantly, thank you so much for coming and participating in this event. thank you for coming to heritage, and join me in thanking our panelists for a really great presentation. [applause] [inaudible conversations] ..

. >> why not criticize prime minister netanyahu's speech, because he felt sure? -- he fell short? >> we want to focus on how we can get to this ultimate goal that the whole world wants. we take it as a positive that he accepted this idea of two states living side by side. >> just had an election -- >> pretty much opposed -- >> much of the world. >> yemen. the bodies of the missing europeans have turned up. >> i did not know what you are referring to. >> can you give me a little bit more -- >> they were killed, germans, a brit, and a south korean. i will have to look into that. >> looking for a comment on that, wart increased security concerns. >> we will look into what. -- it. thank you. >> the u.s. house meets for legislative work at 2:00 p.m. eastern. nearly 20 bills and resolutions will be considered, including giving the inspector general who oversees afghanistan more spending, authority to hire more inspectors. the building of the debate this afternoon, live coverage here on c-span. c-span3 is live at 1:30 p.m. eastern as the health of the world health organization's poll bil

when he is ringing prime minister benjamin netanyahu, such as the expansion of the settlements that's not good enough, the settlements are illegal and there will be no two-state solution unless the settlements are closed down. that is something no one is talking about and we will might get peace without a willingness to move on settlements. third, i agree with those who said a membership with this inquiry is feeble. we do need senior politicians to understand political decision making and senior military people who can understand the decisions that were made and surely, the inquiry is welcome, but it should be allowed to take hearings in private or public as it sees fit rather than kept completely secret. >> first of all, i do regret the lives of all those who have suffered and the loss of life amongst any community and nation. and we regret the loss of iraqi lives. but we cannot deny the responsibility for what has happened in iraq play at the hands of saddam hussein. those of us who served in the government knew exactly what he was trying to do and how he had broken every single uni

could i also say to him when he is arraigned prime minister netanyahu could he not point out it isn't just the expansion he is not putting up, the similar -- of the settlements are illegal and there is no state solution unless the settlements will be closed down and that is something that no one is talking about and we won't get peace without willingness to move on the settlements. i agree with us to said the membership of this inquiry is rather feeble, we do need senior politicians to understand political decision making and to new senior military people who can understand the decisions that are made and surely the inquiry should be allowed to take hearings in private or in public as it sees fit rather than kept completely secret. >> first of all, i do regret the lives of all of those who suffered an and the loss of life among senate committee and any nation and we regret the loss of iraqi lives but we can't deny the responsibility for what has happened in iraq at the hands of saddam hussein and both of us who served in the government know exactly what saddam hussein was trying to do