Bush Says Newly Released Intel Discloses al-Qaida Plan Against US

By Paula Wolfson White House 23 May 2007

Download

President Bush says al-Qaida terrorist leaders tried to turn Iraq into a launch pad for attacks on the United States. VOA's Paula Wolfson reports Mr. Bush outlined details of the plan in a speech Wednesday at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy.

President Bush speaks about the war on terror as he delivers commencement address at US Coast Guard Academy graduation ceremony in New London, Connecticut, 23 May 2007

The president says there is hard evidence that al-Qaida operatives in Iraq were told in 2005 to start planning for attacks on U.S. targets outside the country.

In a commencement address at the Coast Guard Academy, Mr. Bush spoke of the link between al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and his followers in Iraq. He said newly released U.S. intelligence information shows bin Laden's intent is clear.

"He believes that if al-Qaida can drive us out, they can establish Iraq as a new terror sanctuary," he said.

The president said a number of terrorist plots have been foiled, and several of bin Laden's allies in Iraq have been captured or killed.

"Successes like these are blows to al-Qaida," he said. "They are testaments to the steps we have taken to strengthen our intelligence, work closely with our partners overseas and keep the pressure on the enemy."

Mr. Bush went on to stress that al-Qaida remains extremely dangerous, and determined. He said Osama bin Laden sees a democratic Iraq as a threat to the group's very existence, indicating the al-Qaida chief will do everything possible to undermine the fragile Iraqi government.

"Victory in Iraq is important for Osama bin Laden. And victory in Iraq is vital for the United States of America," said Mr. Bush.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has released previously classified information about al-Qaida to help buttress its case for continued military operations.

Critics charge Mr. Bush is trying to draw attention away from the ongoing bloodshed in Iraq. Former Senator John Edwards, who is seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, says the president refuses to acknowledge his war policy is a failure.

Edwards told a foreign policy group in New York that Mr. Bush is ignoring the message sent by American voters last November when they elected a Democratic congressional majority.

"The president has played political brinksmanship over the war in Iraq, and he has done it over and over and over."

White House Homeland Security Advisor Fran Townsend defended the decision to release the new information at a time of heated debate on the president's Iraq policy. Townsend told reporters the information was released when investigators felt it was safe to do so, and the timing was not politically motivated.

US Says Iran Will Face New Pressure for Defying UN

By David Gollust State Department 23 May 2007

Download

The United States says Iran will face additional international pressure following release of an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report that Tehran has expanded its uranium-enrichment activities. Consultations about further U.N. sanctions against Iran are expected to begin soon. VOA's David Gollust reports from the State Department.

Officials in Washington are still studying the IAEA report, but say it is clear Iran continues to defy the international community with its nuclear activities and will face additional pressure including tougher sanctions.

The report was issued in Vienna before the Thursday deadline set by the United Nations for Iranian compliance with a sanctions resolution approved March 24, the second such measure since last December.

The report said Iran has neither stopped enriching uranium as demanded by the Security Council, nor has it agreed to any of the transparency measures sought by the U.N. watchdog agency to monitor Iranian nuclear activities.

As such, the IAEA expressed concern about its deteriorating ability to track the Iranian nuclear program that the United States and key allies believe has a secret weapons component.

In a talk with reporters, State Department Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey said the Security Council will have to consider next steps and that in the absence of a sudden policy reversal, Tehran will find itself under increasing pressure from the international community.

Casey said the Bush administration intends to continue a strategy of applying gradually-increasing pressure while leaving open an opportunity for negotiations on the Iranian program.

Casey said while Iranian leaders have been dismissive of the sanctions resolutions to date, they are having a real impact on the country's economy and global standing:

"They are paying the price because of the sanctions that have been imposed, and because of decisions extraneous to that, that banks and individual companies and individual governments are making," he said. "There is heat that is being applied to the Iranian government. We think that they are feeling it and they are going to feel more of it in the coming weeks if they continue to stand opposed to the very basic conditions that the international community has set for them."

U.S. officials had said in advance of the report that the five permanent Security Council member countries and Germany, the so-called P5-plus-1, would begin work on a third, harsher sanctions measure if the Thursday deadline was not met.

Casey said he expects discussions among the six powers to begin shortly at the political directors level.

The nuclear issue is expected to be a key issue for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and foreign minister colleagues late next week at preparatory talks in Berlin for the summit of the G-8 industrial powers opening in Germany June 6.

Iran insists its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and that it is entitled to develop a complete nuclear fuel cycle for an envisaged network of power reactors.

Spokesman Casey said no one in the world community wants to prevent Iran from having a civil nuclear power program, but there must be assurances that the program is not subverted for weapons purposes.

The P5-plus-1 last year offered Iran a variety of economic and political incentives for suspending its enrichment program and returning to nuclear negotiations. The United States said it was prepared for open-ended political talks with Iran on all issues of concern to both sides.

Former Justice Official Testifies on Attorneys Controversy

By Dan Robinson Capitol Hill 23 May 2007

Download

Monica Goodling, a former Department of Justice official and aide to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, 23 May 2007

Monica Goodling, a former Department of Justice official and aide to U.S. attorney general Alberto Gonzalez, has testified before Congress in the controversy over the firing of eight U.S. prosecutors. VOA's Dan Robinson reports from Capitol Hill, majority Democrats say the testimony prompts many new questions, while Republicans say it failed to reveal any information that would damage the attorney general

Monica Goodling was granted partial immunity in return for her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee after she asserted her constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination.

Goodling said although she had the title of Justice Department White House Liaison, her contacts with the White House were limited, and she was not a decision-maker.

"I did not hold the keys to the kingdom as some have suggested. I was not the primary White House contact for purposes of the development or approval of the U.S. attorney replacement plan. I never attended a meeting of the White House judicial selection committee. The attorney general and [his former chief of staff] Kyle Sampson attended those

meetings. To the best of my recollection I have never had a conversation with Karl Rove or Harriet Meiers while I served at the Department of Justice, and I am certain that I never spoke to either of them about the hiring or firing of any U.S. attorney," he said.

Goodling said she did have discussions with staff members of Rove and Meiers, in her words, "regarding specific aspects of the replacement plan", and acknowledged she attended one meeting after the decision to fire the attorneys was made, at which Rove was present.

But she denies ever recommending that specific prosecutors be added to or removed from a list compiled by Kyle Sampson, and does not recall any recommendations coming from the White House.

In resisting calls for his resignation, from Democrats as well as Republicans, Attorney General Gonzalez has maintained that none of the dismissed U.S. attorneys were removed for political reasons, although he acknowledged the matter was handled badly.

Democratic House judiciary committee chairman John Conyers says Goodling's testimony shows there is much more to be learned about possible White House involvement in the firings.

"We have learned today that trust has been violated, that false statements have been made under oath, not Monica Goodling's, and there is a possible obstruction of justice, as well as perjury," he said.

Conyers was referring to Goodling's testimony that Attorney General Gonzalez appeared to have made false statements to Congress, and that a former deputy attorney general, Paul McNulty, withheld information during an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

But Congressman Chris Cannon, a Republican on the committee, assessed the testimony this way. "There were no surprises here today. There was nothing of interest even. Nothing to indicate any kind of corruption. And the premise of all of the activity here is corruption, and we just did not see that," he said.

In her testimony Wednesday, Goodling did acknowledge that she "crossed the line" by taking political considerations into account in some hiring decisions at the justice department.

Neither Paul McNulty, the former deputy attorney general mentioned in Goodling's testimony, nor Kyle Sampson, the former chief of staff to the attorney general, have testified before the House Judiciary Committee.

But saying that plenty has gone wrong and contradictions are all over the place, Congressman Conyers is raising the possibility of calling both of those former officials to testify, along with a repeat appearance by the attorney general.

Gonzales also faces possible no-confidence measures, introduced by Democrats in the House and Senate, although these have yet to be acted upon.

Amnesty International Says World Growing More Fearful, Divided And Dangerous

By Sonja Pace London 23 May 2007

Download

Amnesty International accuses governments and armed groups of fomenting fear to erode human rights and create an increasingly polarized world. The human rights organization launched its annual report in London and other world capitals. VOA's Sonja Pace has this report from the British capital.

Irene Khan holds a copy of Amnesty International Report at a press conference in central London, 23 May 2007

A time of fear is how Amnesty International describes this past year. Amnesty Secretary-General Irene Kahn spoke of an erosion of human rights in an increasingly divided and dangerous world.

"In 2006, short-sighted, fear-mongering policies undermined the rule of law and human rights, fed racism and xenophobia, fueled discrimination, suppressed dissent, intensified conflict and sowed the seeds of more violence," she said.

Speaking to reporters in London, Kahn outlined some of the main points of the report, which documents the human rights situation in 153 countries from January to December 2006.

The U.S.-led war on terror came in for harsh criticism and the report accuses powerful governments of playing on the public's fear to introduce increasingly restrictive laws that erode human rights.

"The U.S. administration is treating the world as one giant battlefield for its war on terror and more evidence surfaced in 2006 to show how suspects were kidnapped, arrested, detained, tortured and transferred from one secret prison to another across the world within impunity and with the complicity of allies," she said.

The report also describes what is says were gross human rights violations across the Middle East, including Iraq.

Iraqi patrol in Baghdad, 21 May 2007

"The Iraqi security forces are inciting rather than stopping sectarian violence. The Iraqi justice system is woefully inadequate and the worst practices of Saddam Hussein's regime - torture, unfair trials, capital punishment and rape with impunity are very much alive today," said Kahn.

Kahn asserts that the war on terror and ongoing violence and turmoil in Iraq have had far reaching effects elsewhere - in that they have diminished U.S. credibility in the world and limited its efforts to stand up for human rights.

Darfur in Sudan is a case in point, says Khan.

A displaced Sudanese woman carries her sons in the Otach Displaced Persons camp in the city of Nyala in Sudan's strife-torn Darfur region, (File)

"Darfur is a bleeding wound on the world's conscience," she said. "The U.S. government has been outspoken on the need to protect civilians in Darfur and we welcome that very much. But nothing proves more clearly the loss of U.S. moral authority than its failure to persuade the Sudanese government to accept U.N. peacekeepers."

The Amnesty report says lack of action by the United States and other U.N. Security Council members to stop last year's war in Lebanon [between Israel and the Hezbollah militant group] and to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is adding to sectarian differences and instability. Kahn cites the ongoing violence and chaos in Gaza, in particular.

"With renewed military attacks, widespread violence, a strangled economy and a collapsing Palestinian pre-state, a human rights nightmare is unfolding under our very eyes while the international community remains complacent," she said.

The Amnesty report's list goes on - repression, detentions, violence against women around the globe from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, in stable democracies such as Britain and the United States and in emerging economic powers such as Russia and China.

While the report harshly criticizes the lack of political leadership around the world to uphold human rights, it praises the work of civil society - non-government groups, activists and in some instances the media, in highlighting human rights abuses and holding governments accountable.

Israel Launches Air Strikes on Gaza Amid New Truce Effort

By Robert Berger Jerusalem 23 May 2007

Download

Israel has launched fresh air strikes in the Gaza Strip, wounding at least seven Palestinians. As Robert Berger reports from VOA's Jerusalem bureau, the attacks occurred as Palestinian leaders pushed for a new truce.

Palestinian children walk amid the rubble of a house, destroyed following an Israeli air strike, in the Jabalia refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, 23 May 2007

Israeli aircraft attacked targets of the Islamic militant group Hamas across Gaza including suspected weapons factories and warehouses and other facilities. Now in its second week, the air campaign is aimed at halting Palestinian rocket attacks. More than 150 rockets have fallen on Israel over the past week, leaving the border community of Sderot a virtual ghost town.

The rockets keep falling despite the air strikes, but Israeli spokeswoman Miri Eisen says a major ground assault on Gaza is not on the table.

"The military themselves are very clear on the fact that even a full-scale invasion would not necessarily stop all of the rocket attacks," said Eisen.

In a bid to end the fighting, moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas traveled from the West Bank to Gaza for talks with Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas. They are trying to restore a Gaza cease-fire with Israel that collapsed last week after a five-month lull in violence.

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat says the current fighting is not in the interest of either side.

"I don't know to who's interest [is it] to undermine the cease-fire?" asked Erekat. "To who's interest [is it] to push back to the cycle of violence and counter-violence?"

The Palestinians have offered to halt the rocket attacks if Israel would extend the Gaza cease-fire to also include the West Bank. But Israel rejects the proposal on grounds that West Bank raids are necessary to prevent suicide bombings in Israeli cities. Palestinian militants say that leaves them no choice but to keep fighting.

VOASE0523_The Making of a Nation

23 May 2007

Watergate: How a Name, and a Failed Break-In, Became a Symbol of Political Corruption
In August 1974, Richard Nixon became the first US president to resign. In doing so he avoided a trial in Congress on charges that he misused government agencies in an effort to hide wrongdoing.

Download
Download

VOICE ONE:

This is Rich Kleinfeldt.

VOICE TWO:

And this is Stan Busby with THE MAKING OF A NATION -- a VOA Special English program about the history of the United States.

(MUSIC)

Today, we complete the story of the thirty-seventh president of the United States, Richard Nixon.

VOICE ONE:

Richard Nixon's first term as president ended with hope for complete American withdrawal from the fighting in Vietnam. Yet Americans still were very angry about the war and its effects on life at home. Paying for it was difficult. Inflation was high. Unemployment was high, too. Some political observers thought the president would not be elected to a second term. Nixon, however, was sure the American people would support him.

President Richard Nixon with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in 1972

He did not campaign in the local primary elections before the Republican convention. Instead, in the winter and spring of nineteen seventy-two, he visited China, Canada, Iran, Poland, and the Soviet Union.

VOICE TWO:

On June seventeenth, nineteen seventy-two, something happened in Washington, D.C. It was a small incident. But it would have a huge effect on the United States.

Five men broke into a center of the National Committee of the Democratic Party. The building was called the Watergate. That name would become a symbol of political crime in the nation's highest office.

VOICE ONE:

At the time, the incident did not seem important. Police caught the criminals. Later, however, more was learned. The men had carried papers that linked them to top officials in the administration.

The question was: Did President Nixon know what was going on? He told reporters he was not involved. In time, though, the Watergate case would lead to a congressional investigation of the president.

(MUSIC)

VOICE TWO:

For a while, the political conventions of the summer of nineteen seventy-two pushed the story of the Watergate break-in out of the major news of the day.

Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew at the 1972 Republican National Convention after their re-nomination

The Democratic Party met and chose George McGovern as its candidate for president. McGovern was a senator from the state of South Dakota. The choice of the Republican Party was no surprise. Delegates re-nominated Richard Nixon.

McGovern attacked Nixon for his policies about Vietnam. McGovern's anger made many voters see him as an extremist.

Nixon won the election of nineteen seventy-two by a huge popular vote. He would not be able to complete his second term, however. This was because Watergate would not go away.

VOICE ONE:

Early in nineteen seventy-three, reporters found the evidence that linked the Watergate break-in to officials in the White House. The evidence also showed that the officials tried to use government agencies to hide the connection.

Pressure grew for a complete investigation. In April, President Nixon ordered the Justice Department to do this. A special prosecutor was named to lead the government's investigation.

VOICE TWO:

A special Senate committee began its own investigation in May. A former White House lawyer provided the major evidence. By July, it was learned that President Nixon had secretly made tape recordings of some of his discussions and telephone calls. The Senate committee asked him for some of the tapes. Nixon refused. He said the president of the United States has a Constitutional right to keep such records private.

VOICE ONE:

A federal judge ordered the president to surrender the tapes. Lawyers for the president took the case to the nation's highest court. The Supreme Court supported the decision of the lower court.

After that, pressure increased for Nixon to cooperate. In October, he offered to provide written versions of the most important parts of the tape recordings. The special prosecutor rejected the offer. So, Nixon ordered the head of the Justice Department to dismiss him. The Attorney General refused to do this, and resigned.

(MUSIC)

VOICE TWO:

President Nixon had another political problem, in addition to Watergate. In late nineteen seventy-three, his vice president, Spiro Agnew, was forced to resign. A court had found Agnew guilty of violating tax laws.

President Nixon asked Gerald Ford to become the new vice president. Ford was a long-time member of Congress from the state of Michigan.

VOICE ONE:

By that time, some members of Congress were talking about removing President Nixon from office. This is possible under American law if Congress finds that a president has done something criminal. Was Richard Nixon covering up important evidence in the case? Was he, in fact, guilty of wrongdoing?

VOICE TWO:

In April nineteen seventy-four, Nixon surrendered some of his White House tape recordings. However, three important discussions on the tapes were missing. The Nixon administration explained. The tape machine had failed to record two of the discussions, it said. The third discussion had been destroyed accidentally. Many Americans did not believe these explanations.

Two months later, the Supreme Court ruled that a president can not hold back evidence in a criminal case. It said there is no presidential right of privacy in such a case.

VOICE ONE:

A committee of the House of Representatives also reached an historic decision in July nineteen seventy-four. It proposed that the full House put the president on trial. If Richard Nixon were found guilty of crimes involved in the Watergate case, he would be removed from office.

Finally, Nixon surrendered the last of the documents. They appeared to provide proof that the president had ordered evidence in the Watergate case to be covered up.

VOICE TWO:

The rights of citizens, as stated in the Constitution, are the basis of American democracy. Every president promises to protect and defend these Constitutional rights. During the congressional investigation of Watergate, lawmakers said that President Nixon had violated these rights.

They said he planned to delay and block the investigation of the Watergate break-in and other unlawful activities. They said he repeatedly misused government agencies in an effort to hide wrongdoing and to punish his critics. And they said he refused repeated orders to surrender papers and other materials as part of the investigation.

VOICE ONE:

Richard Nixon's long struggle to remain in office was over. He spoke to the nation on August eighth.

Richard Nixon waves goodbye from his helicopter as he leaves the White House after resigning on August 9, 1974

RICHARD NIXON: "Throughout the long and difficult period of Watergate, I have felt it was my duty to persevere, to make every possible effort to complete the term of office to which you elected me. In the past few days, however, it has become evident to me that I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that effort. Therefore, I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow."

VOICE TWO:

Never before had a president of the United States resigned. And never before did the United States have a president who had not been elected. Gerald Ford had been appointed to the office of vice president. Now, he would replace Richard Nixon. On August ninth, nineteen seventy-four, he was sworn-in as the nation's thirty-eighth president.

VOICE ONE:

Gerald Ford

Soon after becoming president, Gerald Ford made a surprise announcement. He pardoned Richard Nixon. Many Americans criticized Ford for doing this. But he believed he had good reasons.

Ford wanted to move ahead and deal with the other problems that faced the nation. He did not want Watergate to go on and on. The case did go on, however. Several top officials in the Nixon administration were tried, found guilty, and sent to prison.

VOICE TWO:

The effects of the case went on, too. Watergate influenced government policy and public opinion for years.

For example, laws were passed to prevent an administration from using its power to punish opposition political groups. Intelligence agencies were forced to provide Congress with more information about their activities. And rules were approved to restrict the activities of public officials.

The American public, and especially the press, felt the effects of Watergate. Many citizens and reporters felt less able to believe their government. As one writer said, "Never again will we trust our public officials in quite the same way."

(MUSIC)

VOICE ONE:

This program of THE MAKING OF A NATION was written by Jeri Watson and produced by Paul Thompson. This is Rich Kleinfeldt.

VOICE TWO:

And this is Stan Busby. Join us again next week for another VOA Special English program about the history of the United States.

VOASE0523_Education Report

23 May 2007

Breaking Into News: Journalism Education in US
A student in Vietnam asks about American J-schools in Part 38 of our Foreign Student Series.

Download
Download

This is the VOA Special English Education Report.

A student at Vietnam National University has a question for our Foreign Student Series. Phuong Lan wants to earn a master's degree in the United States and would like to know about journalism programs.

One hundred nine programs are recognized by the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications. Some of the best-known include the ones at the University of Southern California, the University of Missouri and the University of North Carolina. They also include the journalism schools at Columbia University in New York City and Northwestern University in Illinois.

Students at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism

Northwestern, for example, has the Medill School of Journalism. Medill says it provides its graduate students with the chance to study and work in the real world. Local newspapers and television stations carry their reports on government, crime and civic issues in the Chicago area. Other subjects include magazine publishing and Web design. And the Medill News Service offers experience reporting in Washington.

Graduate students at Medill can expect to pay more than fifty-eight thousand dollars this coming school year. That includes a place to live, meals, books and costs like health insurance. Medill also has an undergraduate program.

Medill scholarships or financial aid are not available to international students. Foreign students are advised to seek aid from their home country or groups like the Inter-American Press Association Scholarship Fund. Scholarship winners from Latin America and the Caribbean spend a year at a journalism school in the United States or Canada.

Journalism schools offer professional degrees, and some offer doctorates. Students may be able to earn a joint degree with another program like law or public policy.

It is true that the value of a journalism degree has been a traditional subject of debate among people in the media. But journalism schools offer training in skills like reporting, writing and production. They also teach about legal issues like plagiarism and libel law and freedom of speech. In addition they may offer classes in other areas, including public relations.

And that's the VOA Special English Education Report, written by Nancy Steinbach. Our Foreign Student Series is online with audio files, transcripts and useful links at voaspecialenglish.com. To send us questions, write to special@voanews.com and please include your name and country. I'm Steve Ember.