Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal (2004)

The noxiousness of falsehood rides the horse of dissimulation!

The Coalition Provisional Authority has put up a full translation of the "Zarqawi letter," supposedly from al-Zarqawi to the leaders of al-Qaeda. Here's an extended passage:

In the name of God: ...This enemy, made up of the Shi`a filled out with Sunni agents, is the real danger that we face, for it is [made up of] our fellow countrymen, who know us inside and out. They are more cunning than their Crusader masters, and they have begun, as I have said, to try to take control of the security situation in Iraq. They have liquidated many Sunnis and many of their Ba`th Party enemies and others beholden to the Sunnis in an organized, studied way. They began by killing many mujahid brothers, passing to the liquidation of scientists, thinkers, doctors, engineers, and others. I believe, and God knows best, that the worst will not come to pass until most of the American army is in the rear lines and the secret Shi`i army and its military brigades are fighting as its proxy. They are infiltrating like snakes to reign over the army and police apparatus, which is the strike force and iron fist in our Third World, and to take complete control over the economy like their tutors the Jews. As the days pass, their hopes are growing that they will establish a Shi`i state stretching from Iran through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon and ending in the Cardboard Kingdom of the Gulf. The Badr Brigade entered carrying the slogan of revenge against Tikrit and al-Anbar, but it shed its garb and then put on the emblem[s] of the army and police to oppress the Sunnis and kill the people of Islam in the name of law and order, all under cover of smooth talk.

The noxiousness of falsehood rides the horse of dissimulation. Their Ghunusi religion (one based on special personal enlightenment) veils itself with lies and covers itself with hypocrisy, exploiting the naivete and good-heartedness of many Sunnis. We do not know when our [Islamic] nation will begin to learn from historical experience and build on the testimony of the empty eras. The Shi`i Safavid state was an insurmountable obstacle in the path of Islam. Indeed it was a dagger that stabbed Islam and its people in the back. One of the Orientalists spoke truth when he said that had the Safavid state not existed we in Europe would today be reading the Qur’an just as the Algerian Berber does. Yes, the hosts of the Ottoman state stopped at the gates of Vienna, and those fortifications almost collapsed before them [to permit] Islam to spread under the auspices of the sword of glory and jihad all across Europe. But these armies were forced to return and withdraw to the rear because the army of the Safavid state had occupied Baghdad, demolished its mosques, killed its people, and captured its women and wealth. The armies returned to defend the sanctuaries and people of Islam. Fierce fighting raged for about two centuries and did not end until the strength and reach of the Islamic state had waned and the [Islamic] nation had been put to sleep, then to wake up to the drums of the invading Westerner.

The Qur’an has told us that the machinations of the hypocrites, the deceit of the fifth column, and the cunning of those of our fellow countrymen whose tongues speak honeyed words but whose hearts are those of devils in the bodies of men – these are where the disease lies, these are the secret of our distress, these are the rat of the dike. “They are the enemy. Beware of them.” Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya spoke with truth and honesty when he said – after he mentioned their (Shi`a) thinking toward the people of Islam – “For this reason, with their malice and cunning, they help the infidels against the Muslim mass[es], and they are one of the greatest reasons for the eruption of Genghis Khan, the king of the infidels, into the lands of Islam, for the arrival of Hulagu in the country of Iraq, for the taking of Aleppo and the pillage of al-Salihiyya, and for other things. For this reason, they pillaged the troops of the Muslims when they passed among them going to Egypt the first time. And for this reason, they commit highway robbery against the Muslims. And for this reason, help for the Tartars and Franks appeared from among them against the Muslims. Deep sadness over the victory of Islam appeared, since they were friends with the Jews, Franks, and polytheists against the Muslims. These are among the customs of the hypocrites…. Their hearts are full of vinegar and ire like no others with regard to Muslims old and young, godly and ungodly.

Their greatest [act of] worship is to curse the Muslim friends of God from first to last. These are the people most anxious to divide the Muslims. Among their greatest principles are leveling charges of infidelity and damning and cursing the elite of those who have ruled matters, like the orthodox caliphs and the `ulama’ of the Muslims, because of their belief that anyone who does not believe in the infallible imam, who is not present, does not believe in God and his Prophet, may God bless him and grant him salvation….

The Shi`a love the Tartars and their state because through it they achieved a glory that they did not achieve through the Muslims’ state.…. They were among the greatest helpers [of the Tartars] as they seized the countries of Islam, killing Muslims and capturing their women. The story of Ibn al-`Alqami and his like with the Caliph and their case in Aleppo is famous. All the people know it. If the Muslims defeat the Christians and polytheists, this causes distress among the Shi`a....

Juan Cole writes: "After talking to some contacts in DC, I have concluded that the letter is authentic and derives from al-Zarqawi.* But I maintain that he dictated the basic ideas to a literate scribe, perhaps an Iraqi, who put them in flowery standard Arabic and threw in classical allusions.... A fine, professional Arabist and career diplomat at the Coalition Provisional Authority has now done a complete and more polished translation of the whole letter, which has been posted.... I tend to agree... that the text of the Zarqawi letter for the most part does not support the use so far made of it by the Bush administration.

---

*Abu Mus`ab az-Zarqawi (i.e. Ahmad Fadil Al-Khalailah), the "Arab Afghan" leader of the al-Tawhid terrorist group that has for some time had a rivalry with al-Qaeda.

---

Press Briefing by Scott Mcclellan
the James S. Brady Briefing Room

12:36 P.M. EST

MR. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon, everybody. We have a big turnouttoday. I will go straight to questions. Steve.

Q Do you see any need for a U.N. peacekeeping force in Haiti,or any sort of international assistance to help them through thisprocess?

MR. McCLELLAN: Steve, we are continuing to work with countries inthe Caribbean and the Organization of American States to bring about apeaceful political resolution to the situation in Haiti. Obviously, weare concerned about the humanitarian situation in Haiti, and wecontinue to work on efforts to make sure people have the aid that theyneed there. Secretary Powell has been in close contact with hiscounterparts in the region, and that's where things are now.

Q To follow up, Scott, on that --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'll come to you in a minute.

Go ahead, Helen.

Q I want to revisit a question I asked you last week and youdidn't have the answer -- you may have it now. Did the President everdo community service while he was in the National Guard?

MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, you had said that this was relating to arumor that you heard, and I think there's a difference betweenrumor-mongering and journalism. And so I'm just not going to dignifythose kind of rumors from this podium. I think the records have beenreleased and you have -- all the information is available to youpublicly.

Q So you don't really know?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said this was relating to some trashy rumorsthat are circulating out there, and I'm just not going to dignify themfrom this podium.

Q It's a very simple question.

MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, John.

Q Was there any discussion today about the Democratic victoryin the Kentucky special election, at the White House? And why did thePresident not even cut a commercial for the Republican candidate, theway he did for Congressman Shuster in the last Pennsylvania --

MR. McCLELLAN: He expressed his support for -- in that election.And obviously, there's elections that occur all over the country, andthe President does what he can to support candidates who share hiscompassionate conservative philosophy.

Q Did you think the result was a setback at all for thePresident?

MR. McCLELLAN: I didn't look at it that way at all. Obviously,individual races are decided by the candidates, themselves.

Q Scott, does the White House stand behind its report issuedjust nine days ago, the Economic Report, there will be 2.6 million newjobs created this year?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think we went through a little bit of thisearlier today. I think that people can debate the numbers all theywant; the President is focused on acting on policies to create asrobust an environment for job creation as possible so that we can helpthose who are hurting because they are looking for work and cannot finda job.

The President is encouraged by the direction the economy ismoving. It is growing strong -- or growing stronger, I should say --it is strong and growing stronger. There have been more than 366,000new jobs created in the last five months. The unemployment ratecontinues to decline. It is now the lowest point -- at the lowestpoint it has been in two years, and it is below the average of the'70s, '80s, and '90s. Certainly, productivity continues to be high,and people's disposable incomes are up. There are a lot of goodindications about the direction the economy is moving.

But there is more to do. And the President is focused on acting tocreate as robust an environment as possible. That means acting on hissix-point plan for strengthening our economy even more. We live in achanging economy right now, John, and the President has put forward aplan that will help create as robust an environment for job creation aspossible. It will help retrain workers who have lost their jobs tomeet the jobs of the 21st century -- these jobs that are high-paid,high-skill jobs. And so that's where the President's focus is on.

Q Well, you say this is a changing economy, and you also saidearlier that this report was based on economic data that is now threemonths old. So would it be wrong for the Democrats, later this year --if you don't meet this 2.6 million forecast of jobs -- would it bewrong for them to beat you on the head about it?

MR. McCLELLAN: It would be wrong for people to raise taxes at thispoint in our economy. And there are some -- (laughter) -- well,there are some that are advocating letting the tax cuts that thePresident worked to pass expire. And what that would be doing israising taxes on small businesses. Small businesses are the economicengine for our economy and they're at the foundation of creating astrong and growing economy. It would raise taxes, if they let thesetax cuts expire, on moms and dads who are trying to raise a family. Itwould raise taxes on married couples by restoring the marriagepenalty.

Q When you dismissed the premise of John's question by saying,people can debate the numbers, let's be realistic here, the debate isgoing on between your Council of Economic Advisors and TreasurySecretary John Snow. Are there people here in this White House whonever believed that forecast?

MR. McCLELLAN: Look, John, I think that the Council of EconomicAdvisors puts out an annual report on the economy; it's the President'sEconomic Report. And they do that every year. They've been doing itfor some 20 years now. That's based on economic modeling and the datathat is available at that point in time. The President is interestedin the actual number of jobs being created, and the President isinterested in making sure that everybody who is looking for a job canfind one. That's where the President's focus is.

That's why I say people can debate the numbers all they want, butthe President is going to be looking at the actual numbers of jobsbeing created. And the number of jobs being created is growing. Thenumber is up. New jobs are being created. The economy is certainlymoving in the right direction. And my point to John was that the lastthing we need to do right now is raise taxes. And we need to focus onthe policy decisions that are being made here in Washington, D.C. tocreate as robust an environment for job creation as possible. Andthat's where the debate ought to be focused.

Q But it would appear, though, that people very high up in thisadministration didn't have a whole lot of faith in the forecast of thereport that went up to Congress just a week ago in terms of the jobcreation numbers.

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, it's an annual economic report that is putout by the administration based on the economic modeling and the datathat's available at that point in time.

Q Can you answer the specific question, though? Was thisreport -- was the prediction of this many jobs, 2.6 million jobs,vetted prior to publication by the entire economic team?

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual report, David. It goes through theusual -- it goes through the usual --

Q That's not the question. Was it or was it not vetted by theentire economic team?

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual report. It goes through the usual--

Q So you don't know, or it was, or it wasn't?

MR. McCLELLAN: Can I get -- can I finish that sentence?

Q When you answer the question. Let's hear it. What's theanswer?

MR. McCLELLAN: The answer was, it is an annual economic report andit goes through the normal vetting process. And if you would let meget to that, I would answer your question.

Q -- the full economic team vetted the prediction --

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual economic report. It's thePresident's Economic Report. But again, the President --

Q Just say yes or no --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- it goes through the normal -- it goes throughthe normal vetting process.

Q So the answer is, yes. I'm not done yet, I've got anotherone.

MR. McCLELLAN: Okay.

Q Why -- if you're suggesting that people will debate thenumbers, that's kind of a backhanded way to say, oh, who cares aboutthe numbers. Well, apparently, the President's top economic advisorsdo, because that's why they wrote a very large report and sent it toCongress. So why was the prediction made in the first place, if thePresident and you and his Treasury Secretary were going to just backaway from it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I disagree with the premise of the wayyou stated that. This is the annual Economic Report of the Presidentand the economic modeling is done this way every year. It's been donethis way for 20-some years.

Q So why not -- why aren't you standing behind it?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think what the President stands behind is thepolicies that he is implementing, the policies that he is advocating.That's what's important.

Q That's not in dispute. The number is the question.

MR. McCLELLAN: I know, but the President's concern is on thenumber of jobs being created --

Q My question is, why was the prediction made --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and the President's focus is on making sure thatpeople who are hurting because they cannot find work have a job.That's where the President's focus is.

Q Then why predict a number? Why was the number predicted?Why was the number predicted? You can't get away with not -- justanswer the question. Why was that number predicted?

MR. McCLELLAN: I've been asked this, and I've asked -- I've beenasked, and I've answered.

Q No, you have not answered. And everybody watching knows youhaven't answered.

MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree.

Go ahead.

Q This nuclear -- put in all of these stories are still makingheadlines all over the globe. Now the story is that, one, is PresidentBush is concerned about this -- and is he considering any sanctions.Because the story -- this technology is now going beyond Pakistanbecause Iran is now saying that they will sell the fuel, and also, hisdaughter, Mr. Khan's daughter fled with all the sensitive documentsfrom Pakistan to England, and she said, my father is -- and I will goto public if something happened to him. Now he had a heart attack andthey --

MR. McCLELLAN: I understand. You heard the President talk aboutthe importance of confronting the threat from the spread of weapons ofmass destruction just last week. He has made it an important priorityof this administration from day one. It is -- the most dangerousthreat that we face is from the spread of weapons of mass destructionand the possibility of those weapons getting in the hands of terroristswho seek to do harm to America and our friends and allies.

And that's why the President is acting decisively to confront thisthreat and make the world a safer place. And certainly the networkthat has been broken up by the government of Pakistan is an importantstep in stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction. This is ashadowy network that exists. The investigation continues, there isstill more that we are learning. But we are acting to break up thisnetwork once and for all.

Go ahead, Jim.

Q Are you talking about Khan --

MR. McCLELLAN: Let me keep going. Go ahead.

Q The President has said he is closely following what'shappening in San Francisco and repeated his statements about beingtroubled and so forth. I still don't understand, what is it that hasto happen for the President to do something other than express hisdispleasure?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, we've talked about from the verybeginning when this issue arose, because some activist judges wereseeking to redefine marriage, that this is a serious matter. ThePresident believes very strongly in protecting and defending thesanctity of marriage. He has made it very clear that he is committedto doing what is legally necessary to protect and defend the sanctityof marriage. He believes very strongly that marriage is a sacredinstitution between a man and woman. And he recognizes that people maydisagree on this issue, and he certainly believes it's important torespect individuals and -- in that process.

But the President is closely looking at these events as theyunfold. You have the events unfolding in Massachusetts, with theactivist judges seeking to redefine marriage. You have events hetalked about earlier today going in San Francisco, where licenses arebeing issued despite -- or without regard for the law in California.There are some that ignoring the law by taking actions in California.And so the President is troubled by these events, and he is concernedabout the direction some of these events are headed.

Q When you keep saying he's troubled and you say he wants todefend it, it's not quite clear at what point the President thinks hisintervention is necessary. What combination of events requires hisintervention?

MR. McCLELLAN: This is an issue where he believes it's importantto stand on principle. He has always believed that marriage is afundamental, enduring institution of our society, and that marriage isbetween a man and a woman. And while he believes it's important totreat everybody with dignity and respect, he also believes it'simportant to do what is necessary to protect the sanctity of marriage.And so we are continuing to look at these events very closely.Obviously, if the President comes to any further decision on this, thenhe will have more to say at that point.

Q No, I understand the decision hasn't been made yet. But I'mjust trying to figure out -- you say the President is determined todefend the sanctity, and that he thinks it's a very serious issue. I'mjust trying to figure out what it is that would require presidentialintervention. You've got bills in the Congress, you've got judgesworking on it. What would the President -- what could he do?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what he said -- well, he said -- he has saidthat if necessary he would be prepared to look to the constitutionalprocess, because that may be the only -- or that would be the onlyalternative available if activist judges continue to redefinemarriage.

Q But what makes that necessary? Does this have to go upthrough the court system? Is that what he's waiting for?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we're continuing to monitor events. You'vegot a legislature in Massachusetts that has been looking at thisissue. You've got officials in California speaking out against what isgoing on in one particular city there.

Q Can I go back to the jobs issue for a moment?

MR. McCLELLAN: Sure.

Q We've been talking about whether or not the CEA forecast ofadding 2.6 million jobs is correct. But actually what CEA forecast wasthat the average number of jobs in 2004 would be 2.6 million higherthan in 2003, which for reasons I won't bore everyone with implies arate of growth in jobs well beyond the, roughly, 200,000 a month thatwould be implied by a 2.6 million rise in jobs. The bottom line hereis that the CEA is forecasting, at a minimum, about 300,000 jobs amonth will be created. Do you stand by that?

MR. McCLELLAN: Economists do economic modeling. That's theEconomic Report of the President. Let me be very clear here, though.This President is focused on what we are doing to create as robust anenvironment as possible for job creation -- not in crunching numbers.He's looking at the actual numbers that are coming in, the actualnumbers that are being created, and looking to make sure we're doingeverything we can to keep our economy moving in the right direction andcreate more jobs.

I mean, this is an important debate going on in this nation, andthere's a clear choice. Some people -- some people want to turn backand take actions that would raise taxes on people, at a time when oureconomy is really starting to grow strong.

Q Okay, well, on that point, the President's advisors have, atvarious times, made very specific predictions about the number of jobsthat would be created by the very policies that you are continuing toadvocate right now, specifically the tax cuts. Those projections havenot come to pass.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you're talking about some original proposalsthat were proposed, and then you have to look at what was actuallypassed.

Q They were changed only minimally from what was originallyproposed. Why should we believe that these projections are any better,or reflecting better the impact of these policies, than your previousprojections?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think when you say what should you believe, Ithink you should focus on what policy decisions the President is makingto create more jobs in this country. It's important that we continueto act to create as many jobs as possible in this country, and thatmeans creating a robust environment for job creation. That's where thePresident's focus is on. Like I said, we can debate the numbers allyou want here, or we can look at the number crunchers. Economists doeconomic modeling, them make forecasts. There are blue-chips outthere, there are a number of different economists out there withdifferent interpretations. And it's based on assumptions --

Q The question is, why --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- it's based on assumptions at that point intime.

Q -- how can you sell these policies as creating jobs when, infact, they haven't?

MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree --

Q Or at least not to the degree that you previously projected.

MR. McCLELLAN: Oh, no, disagree. Well, one, let's have adiscussion about that, because you have to look at the fact that we arein a changing economy right now. I talked about that when John rosethis issue. You have productivity growth at very high levels thesedays. And that's a good thing, because it means increased livingstandards; it means more -- it means higher pay for workers, so theyhave more money at their disposal.

And in this changing economy, we have an economy that is strong andgrowing stronger. But because productivity growth is so high, you'renot seeing the same kind of job numbers that you would expect at thislevel of GDP. And so that's why --

Q But that's not what --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's why the President put forward asix-point plan to create an even more robust environment for jobcreation. That's why he's called on Congress to pass comprehensiveenergy legislation. That's why he's called on Congress to address therising cost of health care. That's why he's called on Congress to passmedical liability reform. That's why he's called on Congress tocontinue to act to promote free trade with a level playing field.

Q And do you think that will create more jobs this year?

MR. McCLELLAN: It will create an even more robust environment forjob creation when Congress acts on those measures. Absolutely. Butlet me dispute -- you said jobs weren't being created. Jobs are beingcreated. There's 366,000 new jobs over the last five months that havebeen created.

Q What I said was that jobs aren't being created at the levelthat you were projecting when you were advocating the passage of thesepolicies.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, what was originally proposed versuswhat actually passed.

Q Scott, just a quick follow-up on that. As Dick mentioned, itdoes project basically at least 300,000 jobs a month. You, yourself,just mentioned that there are a lot of economists out there who haveprojections; the blue-chip forecasters is one that is often cited.They're averaging 166,000 a month. The top ten of the blue-chipforecasters are averaging 225,000 a month. What does the White Houseknow to project over 300,000 -- a minimum of 300,000 --

MR. McCLELLAN: We had a briefing on the Economic Report when thatwas put out, with our economists there to answer your questions --

Q Why are you so much more optimistic?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and I think they answered the questions at thattime.

Q Why are you so much more optimistic, Scott?

MR. McCLELLAN: I've already addressed this question.

Go ahead.

Q Just to go back to this number. This is a report that notonly was put out by the President's economists, but it was signed bythe President of the United States, this report. So, obviously, hesupported the concept of projecting 2.6 million jobs over the nextyear. You're not -- you still have not said that the President standsby that.

MR. McCLELLAN: I said it was the Economic Report of the President,and that the modeling that is done in those reports is done by oureconomists over in the Council of Economic Advisors. They do thisevery year. They've done it for some 20 years, in every administrationbefore us over those 20 years.

Q So, looking back -- let's say we get to October and Novemberon this past year, 2004, and if that projection is not fulfilled, howwould that not be a failure of this administration?

MR. McCLELLAN: What we are going to do is continue to focus on thepolicy decisions that are being made here in Washington, D.C. and thepolicies the President is putting forward. This President has acteddecisively to get our economy out of a recession, that he inherited,and get it growing strong. And it's growing stronger at this point.It is moving in the right direction. This is where the debate needs tobe, is on the policy decisions that are being made here in Washington,D.C., and do we continue to act to strengthen this growth even more, sothat we can see more new jobs being created, or do we turn back and seeour economy slow down.

There are some that would advocate letting those tax cuts expire,which means taxes would be raised on working moms and dads trying toraise a family, that taxes would be raised on small business. That'swhere the debate should be.

Q Given the environment that we're in, the politicalenvironment, given the importance of this jobs issue this electionyear, was it a mistake to make that prediction?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, that's something that's done every year inthe annual Economic Report. I mean, you're trying to get in here toget me to answer questions that are trying to trap me into certainthings. That's not the way --

Q I'm just asking a question --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I think there are some that are looking forheadlines here --

Q No, we're looking for answers, not headlines.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- the President is focused on what is happening --go ahead.

Q Scott, there is a simple question, very important questionthat will face voters this fall. The President repeatedly speaks tothe fact that when he says something you can take it to the bank. Ifthe President signs a report making a prediction, shouldn't voters holdhim responsible and accountable for that prediction?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, those are forecasts made by our economistsat a specific point in time, based on the data at that point.Productivity growth can affect those assumptions that are put intothose economic forecasts. So different economists have differentforecasts on the productivity growth. Some think it's going to belower; some think it's going to be higher. But productivity growth --

Q Okay, but shouldn't he be held responsible --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- it's important -- it's important for -- it's agood thing that productivity growth is high. But we also need tocontinue to strengthen the economy even more.

Q My question was about his prediction and whether he should beheld responsible --

MR. McCLELLAN: I think we've been through this issue.

Q Scott, when you talk about the unemployment -- or the jobsbeing created, is that based on the payroll survey, or the householdsurvey? Because there's -- because of the tax cuts, there's been atremendous increase in the number of entrepreneurs that have startedtheir own businesses, and those numbers aren't reflected in the payrollsurvey.

MR. McCLELLAN: That's correct, yes. The household survey isdifferent from the payroll survey. And the household survey showedthat some -- an increase of 496,000 jobs in January alone. So thereare different numbers that you're talking about there. And we can lookat both. But, again, you're getting into -- you're getting into thenumbers here. The numbers that the President is interested in is theactual numbers of jobs being created and the policies that we aretaking to create an even more robust environment for job creation.

Q Can I ask one more question?

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, go ahead.

Q It's a different subject. The Welfare Reform Act comes upthis year for renewal. Is the President supporting efforts to insertmeaningful work requirements into the bill, where today there is none?

MR. McCLELLAN: We've been advocating passage of the WelfareReauthorization bill for quite some time now. Congress needs to act tostrengthen those work requirements even more and build upon thesuccesses of the original legislation that was passed in the mid-90s.

Q This President has had a number of issues come up over thelast couple of weeks in which his credibility has been questioned --Medicare costs, the budget, Iraq -- even from within your own party.So now you've put out a number that says you -- that your tax plan,your policies will erase all job losses, 2.6 -- it will create 2.6million jobs. You erase all the losses from his first term byNovember. And now you say, well, maybe it will, maybe it won't. Whatare we --

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think -- I don't think that's what I said,Bob. You're putting words in my mouth. I don't think that's what Isaid. I said that this is our annual Economic Report that is based onthe economic modeling done by our economists. And it's based on thatsnapshot at that point in time, based on the data that is available atthat point.

Q But your point is that you don't stand behind that number,that number --

MR. McCLELLAN: Some people are putting those words in my mouth. Isaid that this was -- this was the President's Economic Report that isput out every year. So I made that very clear. But let's talk about-- you brought up an important issue. Let me remind you that thisPresident does exactly what he says he is going to do. This Presidentsaid he was going to take steps to strengthen our economy and get itout of a recession. And he advocated the passage of tax cuts, andthose tax cuts are working. He is doing exactly what he said he woulddo. And now he's calling on Congress to take even more steps to createan even more robust environment for job creation. And that's where thefocus ought to be. And that's where his focus is.

Q Scott, with the political situation changing constantly inIraq, what is going to happen now? Will Paul Bremer leave after Junethe 30th, and what happens to the administration there at all?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, his job ends at that point, when sovereignty istransferred.

Q And the whole American administration? We know that themilitary stays in, but what happens to --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, there's -- well, the Coalition ProvisionalAuthority ceases to exist at that point in time.

Q And then if there's nobody to turn it over to, then whathappens?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?

Q If they're not organized --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, we'll be transferring sovereignty to atransitional government at that point.

Q Scott, two questions real quick. On Haiti, one; and then theother on gay marriage. First, on Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristidebelieves that the White House is blaming him for the problems that arehappening there now, and that's some of the reason why theadministration is kind of cool to the fact of going in to help with theproblems there.

And also on gay marriage, has the President discussed with the VicePresident his feelings about gay marriage, especially since the VicePresident has a family member who is gay?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think he very much knows the President's views.

Q But I mean -- yes, he knows the President views. But havethey -- this is a major issue. This is --

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, April, they discuss important issues likethat.

Q They have. Well, could you tell us to what length and whathave they said?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't get into the President's privateconversations.

Q No, no, but, seriously, Scott, this is a politically divisiveissue. And the Vice President has a family member who is gay; thePresident defines marriage as man and women. Have they come togetherand tried to -- has the Vice President tried to discuss with him theissue of seeing it his way, or his family member's way?

MR. McCLELLAN: April -- April, the President has always said it'simportant to treat all people with dignity and respect. But this is anissue of principle. This is an issue that he feels very stronglyabout. And it's taking a principled stand to protect and defend thesanctity of marriage. That's what this is about. Marriage is afundamental, enduring institution of this country. And the Presidentis committed to protecting it.

Q And now on Haiti, what about --

MR. McCLELLAN: What was your question?

Q The question was the fact that Jean-Bertrand Aristide saysthat the administration is blaming him for the problems there, and isthis some of the reason why the administration is not going to --

MR. McCLELLAN: We're actually working very closely with other

nations in the region to bring about a peaceful resolution. We'reworking to end the violence and bring about a political dialogue thatfocuses on negotiation and compromise. There's some steps that werespelled out by the Caribbean community in a joint statement, I thinkthat was released last Friday, steps that they called on Haiti to taketo make some changes in the way it's governed, and to make some changesin the security situation in Haiti.

Q What do you say to Aristide when he says that the U.S. isblaming him for the problems there? Is that true?

MR. McCLELLAN: What we are trying to do is resolve this issuethrough a political dialogue --

Q But are you blaming him -- trying to resolve --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and end the violence.

Q Are you blaming him?

MR. McCLELLAN: Look, April, our focus is on bringing this to apeaceful, political resolution --

Q But are you blaming him? We understand that. Are youblaming him?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and there are steps that the government of Haitican take that will help in the long-term, as well.

Q Two questions. One, both Japanese and Iranian officials havesaid that Japan will sign a $2-billion oil field development deal inIran. In the past, the United States has tried to curtail investmentin Iran's oil industry, and apparently the U.S. did ask Japan not to goahead with this deal. Do you have any reaction to the news that Japanis going to go ahead and invest in the Iranian oil industry?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm just now hearing about this report. I'll beglad to look into it and get you more information.

Q And the second question, the energy bill -- there's some talkup on Capitol Hill it may hit $14 billion in costs as it's scored. Isthat too high? Because I think previously you had said $8 billion wasyour limit.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we put forward our budget, and we havepreviously called on -- you're correct -- the $8 billion range in theenergy legislation. We are continuing to work closely withcongressional leaders to pass a comprehensive energy plan that willreduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy. So we're workingvery closely with Congress on that.

It's also important to look at this in the context of thePresident's overall budget framework. He put forward a budget thatmeets our priorities and holds the line on spending elsewhere. So it'simportant that we make sure that we're looking at it in that context.I talked about the highway legislation last week, and obviously, thereare some that are talking about coming more in line with what thePresident had originally proposed on the energy legislation. And we'recontinuing to work with them on those issues.

Q Will themselves $14 billion trigger a veto?

MR. McCLELLAN: We're going to continue to work closely withCongress to get this passed.

Q The Tunisian government has been cooperating with theadministration in the war on terror. It's also a government that hasjailed reporters and restricts a political process. The government hastalked about the need to bring democracy to the Middle East. Is thePresident willing to give some countries a pass on democracy and humanrights in return for cooperation in the war on terror?

MR. McCLELLAN: I wouldn't look at it that way at all. In fact,we'll have more for you on a readout from the meeting later today. Butthe President -- I think you heard the President talk about this veryissue in the Oval Office -- this President is strongly committed toadvancing freedom and democracy, particularly in the Middle East.

And Tunisia has made some important progress when it comes toeconomic and social reform. They have certainly recognized theimportance of women's rights. And that's important progress, but thereis more to do. And this President makes it clear in meetings he haswith world leaders that we are strongly committed to seeing continuedprogress on those areas, including on democracy. I think the Presidenttalked about making sure that there is an open political system. Hetalked about the importance of -- I expect he will talk about theimportance of human rights and human dignity, rule of law, and freedomof press, one of the issues you just mentioned.

Q So the President has talked to --

MR. McCLELLAN: Those are principles that we believe in verystrongly.

Q So these are points that the President has or intended tomake today --

MR. McCLELLAN: We'll have more of a readout, but, absolutely, heraises those issues all of the time in meetings with world leadersbecause he believes very strongly in them.

Go ahead, Jacobo.

Q Two questions, please. The Democratic candidates for thenomination have stopped attacking themselves and have been attacking --

MR. McCLELLAN: People are attacking themselves? (Laughter.)

Q It's a jungle out there --

MR. McCLELLAN: I wish you would attack yourselves instead of me.(Laughter.)

Q We love ourselves.

MR. McCLELLAN: Now they're focusing all of their attacks on thepolicies of President Bush. When is he going to start answering back?

MR. McCLELLAN: Look, the President is going to remain focused onthe important priorities before this country. There will be plenty oftime to talk about the differences down the road. I think the Americanpeople will have plenty of time to focus on the election as we getcloser to November. But they want us to remain focused on theimportant priorities we've been discussing in this room, from theeconomy to the war on terror, and so forth.

Q -- second question, please. The President of Venezuela, HugoChavez, has been accusing the United States of intervening in theVenezuela political process, which he says should be an internalaffair. What does the White House --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, repeat that first part.

Q The President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, has been accusingthe United States of intervening in the Venezuelan political process,saying it should be an internal affair.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we've talked about the importance ofsupporting democratic reforms, and that's the President's -- that's thePresident's views.

Q Scott, a group of prominent scientists, including someuniversity presidents and Nobel laureates, signed a letter todaycomplaining that the White House has systematically skewed science tofit its policy agendas. In particular, they accuse the administrationof stacking federal advisory panels and suppressing EPA studies thatdon't agree with policy objectives. Have you seen the letter, and canyou respond --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I haven't, but I can assure you that this is anadministration that makes decisions based on the best availablescience. And I would point to what we are doing in terms of thePresident's Clear Skies initiative as a prime example. We've seen thesuccess from the acid rain program of this market-based approach. Andthe President has put forward a Clear Skies initiative to cut powerplant emissions by 70 percent. And that's an initiative that is basedon the best available science. And that's what we do with all ourpolicies in this realm.

And I would point out to you that as an example of how strongly webelieve in making decisions based on the best available science, thisadministration has worked on an independent peer review process to lookat how science is used in regulatory decisions. That is something ourOffice of Management and Budget has been working on, so that we canmake sure that those decisions are being made based on the bestavailable science.

Thank you.

END 1:08 P.M. EST

Posted by DeLong at February 21, 2004 10:26 AM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this post