Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
122241500
label
[01/28/1998 – 06/25/1998]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
122241500
contentType
document
title
[01/28/1998 – 06/25/1998]
citationUrl
collections
Presidential Electronic Mail from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS)
Automated Records Management System (ARMS) Email from the Office of Policy Development (OPD) Bucket
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
122241500
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-26444780-20150017F-Seg2-001-008-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9d427d228b19f5d1
ocrText
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. email
Brad L. Austin to Trey Graham at 13:49:29.00. Subject: RE: This
03/24/1998
Personal Misfile
Friday. (1 page)
002. email
Daniel C. Montoya to Jeff Trandahl at 09:50:10.00. Subject: RE: gays
04/10/1998
b(6)
in the military. (1 page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Don't Ask, Don't Tell])
OA/Box Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/28/1998 - 06/25/1998]
2015-0017-F
ab1568
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information |(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA|
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information |(a)(4) of the PRA|
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information |(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy |(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA|
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIAJ
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY (SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN ) (WHO)
CREATION DATE/TIME:28-JAN-19981 23:19:17.00
SUBJECT: 1998-1-12 McCurry Briefing
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [
UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY[UNKNOW\
1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: WOZNIAK_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY WOZNIAK_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN ) (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: NAPLAN_S@A1@CD@LNGTWY (NAPLAN_S@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: TDIXON@PR_L=AVUOEOB@MRP@LNGTWY (PR_U=TDIXON@PR_L=AVUOEOB@MRP@LNGTWY[
UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: LIZIK_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY (LIZIK_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN 1) (OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: HAAS_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY (HAAS_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN 1) (OMB)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: GRAY_W@A1@CD@LNGTWY (GRAY_W@A1@CD@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN ) (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: CUTLER_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY (CUTLER_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN ()
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BARTHOLOW_T@A1@CD@LNGTWY (BARTHOLOW_T@A1@CD@LNGTWY[ UNKNOWN (OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BARBUSCHAK_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY (BARBUSCHAK_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN 1) (OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY UNKNOWN ]
)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWV [ UNKNOWN ]
)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY (SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (WHO)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: William H. White Jr.@EOP ( William H. White Jr.@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Woyneab M. Wondwossen@eop Woyneab M. Wondwossen@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Glen M. Weiner@eop (Glen M. Weiner@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman@eop (Michael Waldman@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr@eop ( Thurgood Marshall Jr@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul A. Tuchmann@eop (Paul A. Tuchmann@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv@EOP ( Barry J. Toiv@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: terri tingen@eop ( terri tingen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lisa Tamagni@eop ( Lisa Tamagni@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Tracy F. Sisser@eop (Tracy F. Sisser@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael J. Sullivan@EOP (Michael J. Sullivan@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Darby E. Stott@eop ( Darby E. Stott@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Aviva Steinberg@eop ( Aviva Steinberg@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Maria E. Soto@eop ( Maria E. Soto@eop [ PIR ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Richard Socarides@EOP (Richard Socarides@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Brian D. Smith@eop ( Brian D. Smith@eop [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jake Siewert@eop ( Jake Siewert@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: June Shih@eop ( June Shih@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ruby Shamir@eop (Ruby Shamir@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Judithanne V. Scourfield@eop (Judithanne V. Scourfield@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Roger V. Salazar@eop ( Roger V. Salazar@eop [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia N. Rustique@eop (Virginia N. Rustique@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Charles F. Ruff@eop (Charles F. Ruff@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Victoria Radd@eop ( Victoria Radd@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Peter O'Keefe@EOP (Peter O'Keefe@EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sally P. Paxton@eop ( Sally P. Paxton@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kristen E. Panerali@eop ( Kristen E. Panerali@eop [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Orszag@eop (Jonathan Orszag@eop [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Neera Tanden@eop ( Neera Tanden@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Mark D. Neschis@eop (Mark D. Neschis@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael V. Terrell@eop (Michael V. Terrell@eop [ CEQ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Reuben L. Musgrave Jr.@eop ( Reuben L. Musgrave Jr.@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Murchinson@eop (Jonathan Murchinson@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Tamara Monosoff@eop (Tamara Monosoff@eop [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Cheryl D. Mills@eop ( Cheryl D. Mills@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: R. Scott Michaud@eop (R. Scott Michaud@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne E. McGuire@eop ( Anne E. McGuire@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Doris O. Matsui@eop ( Doris O. Matsui@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura S. Marcus@eop ( Laura S. Marcus@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lisa J. Levin@eop ( Lisa J. Levin@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph P. Lockhart@eop (Joseph P. Lockhart@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christopher J. Lavery@eop ( Christopher J. Lavery@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP ( Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sarah S. Freeman@eop ( Sarah S. Freeman@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Allison J. King@eop ( Allison J. King@eop [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: David E. Kalbaugh@EOP ( David E. Kalbaugh@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jon P. Jennings@eop ( Jon P. Jennings@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michele Jolin@EOP (Michele Jolin@EOP [ CEA 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: david t. johnson@eop ( david t. johnson@eop [NSC])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Maureen A. Hudson@eop (Maureen A. Hudson@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Richard Hayes@eop ( Richard Hayes@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Peter D. Greenberger@eop ( Peter D. Greenberger@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason S. Goldberg@EOP ( Jason S. Goldberg@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jessica L. Gibson@eop ( Jessica L. Gibson@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeremy M. Gaines@eop ( Jeremy M. Gaines@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Carmen B. Fowler@eop ( Carmen B. Fowler@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie A. Fernandes@eop (Julie A. Fernandes@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rahm Emanuel@eop ( Rahm Emanuel@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dorinda A. Salcido@eop ( Dorinda A. Salcido@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Diane Ikemiyashiro@eop ( Diane Ikemiyashiro@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elliot J. Diringer@eop ( Elliot J. Diringer@eop [ CEQ ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Suzanne Dale@eop ( Suzanne Dale@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michelle Crisci@eop ( Michelle Crisci@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven A. Cohen@eop ( Steven A. Cohen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Andrei H. Cherny@ovp@eop ( Andrei H. Cherny@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph W. Cerrell@OVP@EOP (Joseph W. Cerrell@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bradley M. Campbell@EOP Bradley M. Campbell@EOP [ CEQ D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Allison Balderston@eop ( Allison Balderston@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Katharine Button@EOP ( Katharine Button@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lanny A. Breuer@eop ( Lanny A. Breuer@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: antony j. blinken@eop ( antony j. blinken@eop [ NSC ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: David S. Beaubaire@eop ( David S. Beaubaire@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kris M Balderston@EOP (Kris M Balderston@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robin J. Bachman@eop (Robin J. Bachman@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Eli G. Attie@OVP@EOP ( Eli G. Attie@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori Anderson@eop (Lori Anderson@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori E. Abrams@eop ( Lori E. Abrams@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN
1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: INFOMGT@A1@CD@LNGTWY (INFOMGT@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (SYS)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: US@2=WESTERN UNION@3=@5=ATT.COM@*ELN62955104@MRX@LNGTWY(I=US@2=WESTERN
UNION@3=@5=ATT.COM@*ELN\62955104@MRX@LNGTWY[UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY UNKNOWN
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: WEINER_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY (WEINER_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (DON)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SMITH_BD@A1@CD@LNGTWY (SMITH_BD@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN 1) (OMB)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: RILEY_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY (RILEY_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN ) (OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: MOFFETT_J@A1@CD@LNGTWY (MOFFETT_J@A1@CD@LNGTWY ) (WHO)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: JOHNSON_WC@A1@CD@LNGTWY (JOHNSON_WC@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO:GRIBBEN_J@AI@CD@LNGTWY(GRIBBEN_J@AI@CD@LNGTWY[UNKNOWNJ)OMB)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: DICKEY_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY (DICKEY_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (WHO)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: CROWLEY_P@A1@CD@LNGTWY (CROWLEY_P@AI@CD@LNGTWY[UNKNOWN 1) (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BARTHOLOME_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY (BARTHOLOME_M@AI@CD@LNGTWY ] UNKNOWN
(OA)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY(wh-outbox-
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY[ UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: COGDELL_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY (COGDELL_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN (WHO)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Debra S. Wood@eop ( Debra S. Wood@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lowell A. Weiss@eop (Lowell A. Weiss@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Angelina Walker@ovp@eop ( Angelina Walker@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dag Vega@eop (Dag Vega@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: June G. Turner@eop (June G. Turner@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Serena C. Torrey@eop ( Serena C. Torrey@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Amy W. Tobe@eop (Amy W. Tobe@eop [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop ( Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sylvia M. Mathews@eop ( Sylvia M. Mathews@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan H. Schnur@OVP@EOP (Jonathan H. Schnur@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Diane A. Stumpf@eop (Diane A. Stumpf@eop [ ONDCP ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Todd Stern@eop (Todd Stern@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elisabeth Steele@eop ( Elisabeth Steele@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Douglas B. Sosnik@eop ( Douglas B. Sosnik@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Craig T. Smith@eop ( Craig T. Smith@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joshua Silverman@EOP (Joshua Silverman@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robert M. Shireman@eop ( Robert M. Shireman@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Douglas S. Sheorn@eop ( Douglas S. Sheorn@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Brooks Scoville@eop ( Brooks Scoville@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: G. Timothy Saunders@EOP (G. Timothy Saunders@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Evan Ryan@eop (Evan Ryan@eop [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Peter Rundlet@eop ( Peter Rundlet@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Nelson Reyneri@eop ( Nelson Reyneri@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Nicole R. Rabner@eop (Nicole R. Rabner@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julia M. Payne@eop (Julia M. Payne@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Carole A. Parmelee@eop ( Carole A. Parmelee@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Peter R. Orszag@eop ( Peter R. Orszag@eop [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael A. O'Mary@eop ( Michael A. O'Mary@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elizabeth R. Newman@eop ( Elizabeth R. Newman@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Naplan@eop ( Steven J. Naplan@eop [ NSC ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sean P. Maloney@eop ( Sean P. Maloney@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Melissa M. Murray@eop (Melissa M. Murray@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin Moran@eop ( Kevin Moran@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Megan C. Moloney@eop ( Megan C. Moloney@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elisa Millsap@eop ( Elisa Millsap@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Estela Mendoza@eop ( Estela Mendoza@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Andrew J. Mayock@eop ( Andrew J. Mayock@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Tanya E. Martin@eop ( Tanya E. Martin@eop [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael D. Malone@eop ( Michael D. Malone@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura D. Schwartz@eop ( Laura D. Schwartz@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne H. Lewis@eop ( Anne H. Lewis@eop [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sara M. Latham@eop ( Sara M. Latham@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jim Kohlenberger@OVP@EOP (Jim Kohlenberger@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Catherine T. Kitchen@eop ( Catherine T. Kitchen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: William R. Kincaid@eop ( William R. Kincaid@eop [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason@eop (Julie E. Mason@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: James M. Teague@EOP ( James M. Teague@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Leanne I. Johnson@EOP (Leanne I. Johnson@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Thomas D. Janenda@EOP (Thomas D. Janenda@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Russell W. Horwitz@eop ( Russell W. Horwitz@eop I OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Donald Goldberg@eop ( Donald Goldberg@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dario J. Gomez@eop ( Dario J. Gomez@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Adam W. Goldberg@eop ( Adam W. Goldberg@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Grace A. Garcia@eop ( Grace A. Garcia@eop [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ben A. Freeland@eop ( Ben A. Freeland@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen E. Finney@eop ( Karen E. Finney@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen C. Fahle@eop (Karen C. Fahle@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards@eop ( Anne M. Edwards@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dorian V. Weaver@eop ( Dorian V. Weaver@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel W. Burkhardt@eop ( Daniel W. Burkhardt@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lanny J. Davis@eop ( Lanny J. Davis@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anna E. Cushing@eop ( Anna E. Cushing@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julianne B. Corbett@eop ( Julianne B. Corbett@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Nanda Chitre@eop ( Nanda Chitre@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: David K. Chai@eop ( David K. Chai@eop [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Phillip Caplan@eop ( Phillip Caplan@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barbara D. Woolley@eop ( Barbara D. Woolley@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Patrick E. Briggs@eop ( Patrick E. Briggs@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Alexander L. Boyle@eop ( Alexander L. Boyle@eop [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Marsha E. Berry@eop (Marsha E. Berry@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Beverly J. Barnes@eop ( Beverly J. Barnes@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kyle M. Baker@eop (Kyle M. Baker@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Patrick Aylward@eop ( Patrick Aylward@eop [ PIR ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Brenda M. Anders@eop ( Brenda M. Anders@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeannetta P. Allen@eop ( Jeannetta P. Allen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sharolyn A. Rosier@EOP ( Sharolyn A. Rosier@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 12, 1998
PRESS BRIEFING
BY MIKE MCCURRY
The Briefing Room
1:22 P.M. EST
MR. MCCURRY: Thanks to General McCaffrey for that.
Where in the world do you want to start first?
Iraq.
MR. MCCURRY: Iraq.
Q
What is the United States' reaction to Iraq's
announcement that he will bar -- stop the rest of his team from
carrying out their activities?
MR. MCCURRY: We have heard provocative statements from
the government of Iraq on the constitution of U.N. inspection teams
over and over again, and they have been made -- met with the same
resolved response of the international community that has been
expressed repeatedly by the United Nations Security Council.
Now, that said, what the government of Iraq says and
what it does is very often different. And successful inspections
have been conducted by UNSCOM and we will wait to hear from Chairman
Butler as he reports to the Security Council what's actually going to
be the status of inspections as they go forward. But we are clearly
watching the progress that the inspection teams are making. We have
a very significant force deployed in the region in furtherance of the
President's determination to see that the United States can pursue
its objectives in the region. And beyond that, I don't know -- I
think it's a watchful period that we're going to be in as we see what
happens as the inspections go forward.
Q
When did Butler make that report?
MR. MCCURRY: He is expected, I believe, to report in
coming days, and then if I'm not mistaken, he's scheduled to meet and
Tehran with officials from the government of Iraq within the next
week -- Baghdad, Baghdad. Tehran has been on our mind recently, too.
Q
Mike, wasn't the Ritter team composed specifically
to provoke a reaction from the Iraqis?
MR. MCCURRY: The Ritter teams is composed as the United
Nations sees fit. They draw on scientific technical experts from
around the world, and the United Nations really has to tell you how
they make the composition of those teams up. They break into units
from time to time. There is a significant U.N. presence in Iraq now,
and they constitute their teams differently depending on what the
circumstances of an inspection are. So you really have to go to the
U.N. and let them tell you what how they conduct their individual
inspections.
Q
But the Iraqis have complained about Ritter
bitterly for many months now. Isn't this a predictable reaction from
the Iraqis?
MR. MCCURRY: I believe, as Mr. Ritter has indicated, he
has been there for six years and has worked with many of these same
people, and it's not quite clear what their complaints or their
objections are based on.
Q
Mike, you said that this is a watchful period as
these inspections go forward, so it's your understanding and your
belief that these inspections would continue to take place even if
the Iraqis were, for example, blocking one team?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, you've seen them try to provoke a
response from the international community in the past. They have
blocked inspections in the past. We've been there, done that. We'll
have to see what kind of response we have in the days going forward.
Q
But if I could follow up, what I'm saying is, if
the inspections proceed with Iraq saying no to one team, aren't they
dictating the terms of the inspections?
MR. MCCURRY: We've made it clear over and over again,
and the United Nations has made clear, that the constitution of these
inspection teams is not at the whim of the government of Iraq. The
United Nations is the sole determinative of how those teams are
constituted, and that will remain the case.
Q
But you call these provocations; do these
provocations continue? And is it your view that at the end of the
day we will always get our way?
MR. MCCURRY: They continue, the provocations and the
difficulty with which the United Nations has to conduct its
operations continues. But that's been true really for years.
Q
Do you think the American public will say that
that's a policy that we should continue to pursue?
MR. MCCURRY: I think the American public is very
supportive of the significant deployed force we have in the region,
which is there to maintain options available to the President and to
the United Nations.
Q
But if I may just be allowed one more -- but you
know there is some portion of the public that believes the
administration is not acting firmly enough, that Saddam is getting
away with murder.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, he is getting away with willful
violations and harassment of U.N. objectives there. And the U.N. has
responded to that and we have pursued what we think is a concentrated
diplomatic effort to address the behavior that we've seen, working
with others and doing it through the U.N.'s authorized inspection
team there.
But at the same time, the President has made clear that
we are determined to see the objectives of the world community
fulfilled there because those are significant U.S. interests as well,
and he has never ruled out other options that may or may not be
available.
Q
Will the President be making any phone calls to
world leaders to generate a unanimous U.N. Security Council
resolution if it comes down to that?
MR. MCCURRY: He has been in contact with counterparts
from time to time on this subject. I'm not aware that his foreign
policy advisors have recommended that he do anything now in response
to this, but we are watching very carefully the progress that the
Chairman of the U.N. Inspections Committee makes as he both
supervises the inspections that need to occur and as he conducts his
own dialogue with the government.
Q
Do you know, has there been any progress at all on
the inspection of the Presidential palaces, irrespective of this
current decision to block the --
MR. MCCURRY: Well, you should direct that question,
more appropriately, to the United Nations, but I suspect that's a
subject that Chairman Butler wants to pursue in his visit.
Helen?
Q
Has the President heard anything, any report from
his Asian delegation?
MR. MCCURRY: He has. Let me tell you a little bit
about that. Mr. Bowles convened this morning kind of an update
review of a team that's been meeting on and off during the period of
our work on the Asian financial situation consisting of, among
others, the National Economic Advisor, Gene Sperling; the National
Security Advisor, Sandy Berger; Secretary Albright; Secretary Rubin;
Dan Tarullo from the National Security Council working on
international economic issues; and others.
They were able to get a phone report from Deputy
Secretary Summers in Asia on the status on some of his work. He has
been in Singapore and arrived this morning, our time, to Jakarta, and
expects to begin his meetings with Indonesian officials probably late
tonight, our time, which would be the beginning of the work day in
Jakarta. This was reported to the President. When he arrived here,
he got an update from some of the same members of that working group.
And he's following very carefully and closely the work that the IMF
is doing in region, and the work, obviously, that the Deputy
Secretary of the Treasury is doing.
Q
Sounds like you're very concerned if you have that
high level a meeting.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, it's on an off during this period.
We've had roughly that same contingent of officials monitoring this,
sometimes in person, sometimes through there chief deputies,
depending on what other subjects their covering. But it's a
significant issue because the regional economic stability of Asia is
something that impacts directly on the American people, with so much
of our commerce directly tied up with the work that we do in that
region, that there are millions of American families that are
affected by economic conditions in Asia. Thus, it's very appropriate
for the President and many of his key advisors to be involved in
this.
Q
How serious is the problem, the Asian money
problem?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, it's quite serious. As you know, in
some sense, the markets have been telling us. At the same time, we
believe that a very strong and potentially effective program of
response has been developed through the International Monetary Fund.
And the United States will continue to work with other industrialized
nations and with the IMF to address exactly the things that we think
have led to instability in the markets because, ultimately, the
program that they've developed, the reforms they've recommended, the
economic changes that some of these nations will make and many have
indicated they are willing to make, will be the source of a return to
long-term economic stability in the region.
Q
But does the renewed instability in Asian markets
indicate that perhaps those initiatives aren't working?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, it indicates that there's a lot of
work that needs to be done by the governments that need to fulfill
the obligations that they've rendered to the International Monetary
Fund. And there's work that needs to be done by international
monetary officials and then the governments acting independently to
work with these governments to encourage them to implement the type
of economic reforms that will lead to stability.
Q
Is the White House concerned about Congressional
opposition to U.S. participation in these bail out programs? Senator
Faircloth is having a Wednesday meeting for congressional staffers
against it. Senator D'Amato has made statements against it. Jim
Leach is going out this week to the region to investigate.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, we encourage members to explore for
themselves the reality of what is happening in those economies and
the significant interest we have in seeing the success of the
international programs that have been developed carried out, because
that is, ultimately, we believe, very important to the livelihoods of
millions of Americans, certainly millions of constituents that many
of those critics represent.
But at the same time, there will be a vigorous debate on
this. I think members of Congress made that clear. And we will
welcome being a part of that debate because we think the case for
active involvement by the United States is a very good one. We have
longstanding, deeply-held interests in that region that we have
pursued very actively for many, many years now, and we're not about
to give up what we think is the important sense of presence and
strategic interest that we have in that region.
Among other things, in addition to having the Treasury
Secretary in the region meeting with economic officials, as you know,
the Defense Secretary is there now to remind governments in that
region and the peoples of that region that we will remain engaged
with them, and that the security of the Asia Pacific region is of
vital U.S. strategic interest as well.
Q
Mike, does Summers have any assurance from
Soeharto, from any of the other officials in Indonesia, that they are
taking the reform steps that the U.S. is demanding? And what is the
level of concern here? As a follow-up, what is the level of concern
here about social unrest in Indonesia and serious problems like that
spreading even further to other Asian countries?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, without betraying the confidence of
discussions that the President has had, he had a very good
conversation with President Soeharto on exactly that subject. I
think it's safe to say that we believe Deputy Secretary Summers'
meetings would be constructive and useful. And we would not have
believed that if there wasn't at least some indication that the
government of Indonesia takes seriously the program of activity it
has pledged to the IMF.
As to the internal political situation in Indonesia,
that's really a matter for the people of Indonesia and for the
leaders of Indonesia. They have elections scheduled in March, and
it's up to them to make those determinations. But the conditions
upon what they would be able to exercise their judgments and make
those kinds of decisions are certainly enhanced if there is a return
to economic stability in the region, which is in our interest and
ultimately in their interest.
Q
Are Asian governments moving too slowly to
implement the kinds of reforms
MR. MCCURRY: There are a number of different
governments in the region that have made different sets of
arrangements with the IMF and we are working case by case to address
many of those situations. The Deputy Treasury Secretary will be in a
number of places other than Indonesia, and we will work all those
governments in the region to fulfill the kind of program that we
think has the maximum chance of success.
Q
Is the administration working on a fall-back
position if the pace of reform is not satisfactory?
MR. MCCURRY: You've heard the Treasury Department
describe what is sort of a second line of defense that is available,
but at the moment we are encouraging people to make use of the IMF
facilities that have been constructed and that are available.
Q
Mike, with regard to the IMF facilities, it wasn't
enough in South Korea. The United States agreed to put in another
$1.5 billion because of their liquidity crunch. Is the United States
standing ready to provide more funds from the U.S. Treasury for any
of these countries that fail to proceed?
MR. MCCURRY: Do you want to see if I can move markets
around the world? I can't answer that other than to say that we are
in a position to work through the IMF and with other countries to
address the type of economic market conditions that come about when
there is a lack of long-term economic stability. But I think we've
been pretty clear that we can't talk about specific commitments, but
we can talk about the type of work that has been designed by the IMF
and by the governments involved.
Q
Over the weekend, Bruce Babbitt's interview with
the Times, I think it was, was published, in which he said, "I've
made a lot of mistakes" in this Indian casino business. Does the
President still have complete confidence in him? And does the
President believe that Babbitt handled the matter properly?
MR. MCCURRY: Yes, and yes, although he did instruct the
Chief of Staff to explore the matter further and to get a better
understanding. I would also point out over the weekend the Secretary
of the Interior was applauded for his management of difficult water
issues in the West, and he continues to do extraordinarily good work
in addressing the nation's environmental resource management
questions, even as he handles some of these other issues that have
been raised.
Q
Well, help me out. Is this old that the President
had instructed the Chief of Staff to explore the matter further?
MR. MCCURRY: That happened quite some time ago. We
reported on it here.
Q
May I just -- when is the Chief of Staff going to
report to the President, conclude his investigation?
MR. MCCURRY: It happened some time ago.
Q
Why can't he ask that?
Mike, is there any concern at the White House --
Q
I'm unclear, Mike --
MR. MCCURRY: The point of what we told you back a
couple months ago was that the Chief of Staff did explore this, did
talk to the Interior Secretary, and did report back to the President.
I think we covered that in some detail.
Q
So your answers did not come after the Babbitt
interview, this was something that came before?
MR. MCCURRY: No, no. This came up quite some time ago,
and we --
Q
So after the Babbitt interview, the President is
still satisfied with the situation?
MR. MCCURRY: I haven't talked to him specifically about
the New York Times interview, but I'm not aware of any change in his
thinking.
Q
Mike, is there any concern at the White House that
this devastating ice storm in the Northeast may just be a precursor
of a totally wacky weather year that's going to throw all the
budgeting of emergency assistance funds --
MR. MCCURRY: You mean, with the arrival of El Nino and
we've got a front coming in over this -- look, it's hard to talk
about how isolated meteorological effects reflect overall climate
changes. But we do know that there has been significant overall
climate change and that is a source of concern. It does take us back
to the need to pursue the kinds of regimes we talked about with other
members of the world community.
A little update -- as you know, I think the President
declared several counties in upstate New York disaster areas. And
while we haven't received any official requests from the governors of
Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine, there are some preliminary damage
assessments that are being done by FEMA in those states now that
develops the kind of material that could be in support of a request
for disaster assistance if one came, and we're working very closely
and cooperatively both with the state government in New York and then
with the governors and emergency response officials in the states
that have been affected.
I believe also we've got some FEMA presence out in the
Pacific Northwest, too, that's been looking at some of the storms
there.
Q
But the question was, are you sure that FEMA has
enough money to deal with whatever might happen for the rest of the
year?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, they've had a difficult year, but
they've been able to, I think -- they got a supplemental, didn't
they, Barry?
MR. TOIV: No, not for this fiscal year.
MR. MCCURRY: Not for this year. Last year, in the
period when they've had to deal with floods, earthquakes, fires,
they've had difficult taxing of their resources, they've been able to
get the kind of supplementary appropriation from Congress that's
helped them do the work that's so important.
Q
Can we go back to Iraq for a second? You folks
have insisted for many months now that Saddam Hussein is in a box,
and yet you just said a minute ago that he's getting away with
willful violations and harassments of the U.N. weapons inspection
team.
MR. MCCURRY: I did not say that. I said that we would
be watching very carefully to see what he does. He has from time to
time failed to fully comply --
Q
You did say that.
GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, he's failed to fully comply
with the stipulations that have been placed on him by the U.N.
That's been true now for six years.
Right, so how is he -- I don't get how he's in a
box.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, he is motivated we believe in part
by a desire to escape from the effect of the economic sanctions that
are still placed upon him. Those sanctions remain in effect and
there's absolutely no indication that there's any change in the
posture of the world community to keep those sanctions in effect.
Q
Let me follow up if I may. To the extent that the
American people care whether or not Saddam Hussein is in a box, they
care because of the threats that you folks have articulated about
weapons of mass destruction --
MR. MCCURRY: Absolutely.
Q
So how is it -- has anything changed since late
October until today in terms of our ability to find out what he's
doing in chemical or biological weapons?
MR. MCCURRY: In a sense, yes, because -- I don't know
the exact number, but at the time in October he had expelled certain
U.N. inspectors from Iraq that had led the United Nations to withdraw
the entire inspection team. We were in the middle of a significant
problem at that point; inevitably Saddam backed down, the teams went
back in, they've done hundreds of inspections since. But they are
continuing to work on a problem that has not produced all the answers
that they want or that they find sufficient. And there is going to
continue to be that effort and they're going to continue to be
pressed. And no doubt when Chairman Butler reports on his meetings,
at that point we're going to have to make some assessments about what
other steps need to be taken.
Q
If the American team is pulled out, if the American
team is kicked out, is it the position of the United States that all
the teams should leave again?
MR. MCCURRY: The position of the United States is at
that point supportive of the United Nations. When that's happened in
the past, the response of the United Nations and of the Chairman of
the U.N. Special Commission has been quite swift and quite
appropriate in our view.
Q
Mike, the Iraqis allege that Scott Ritter is a spy.
MR. MCCURRY: He has said that is ridiculous and so have
many others. And the United Nations has made clear that he is hired
because of his technical background. He is someone who is
indisputably and expert. And he works for the United Nations. He's
not -- he is a U.S. national, but he works under the direction and
the supervision of the United Nations at this point.
And does not work for U.N. intelligence at any
level?
MR. MCCURRY: He's very clear that he does not. He has
said so himself and others have said so as well.
Mike, to what degree was the White House aware of
complaints from gay rights group about a legal loophole in the '86
Privacy Communications Act where a sailor was essentially outed from
the don't ask, don't tell policy and AOL apparently violated its own
privacy standard by giving information to naval investigators which
led to --
MR. MCCURRY: Chip, I saw that story this morning and I
have to confess to you I failed to make an inquiries at the Pentagon
about what their reaction is. I can we can see if we can take
that and see if the Pentagon has said anything on that today.
Q
On a totally unrelated matter, what is the White
House position on Senator Kennedy's proposal to raise the minimum
wage?
MR. MCCURRY: The Senator has made a number of
interesting and important proposals and a number of them are being
looked at at this point. You know, historically, this President's
commitment to seeing that the minimum wage is a meaningful wage for
people who are working. Very often -- people are working hard and
very often doing so and staying off forms of public assistance, and
we have had an interest -- we've successfully achieved an increase in
the minimum wage, but at this point that's an idea that we have to be
looking at carefully and have to be thinking about as we think of
other things that we are pursuing with respect to macroeconomic
policy.
Q
If I could just follow up, do you anticipate that
that would be something that's possibly going to be included in the
President's State of the Union?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm only anticipating at this point that
it will remain under review.
Q
Mike, the Northern Ireland peace talks resume today
in Belfast. Do you think they have any chance of success given the
recent violence there? And secondly, do you foresee any direct U.S.
involvement in the talks in the weeks and months ahead?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, do I see any prospect for success?
Yes, because the peoples of Ireland are so manifestly committed to
peace and are so upset about the tragic return to violence that
they've seen. At the same time that there has been violence and
there's been a return to the kind of troubles that people in both
families lament, there has also been very determined work by the
government of the U.K. and the Republic of Ireland to advance common
thinking about how progress can be made at Stormont. And the United
States government applauds the work that both governments are doing
to table a proposal. We think that that demonstrates the seriousness
of purpose with which they take the talks, and we encourage the
parties themselves to make best use of this inclusive process to
address the issues that members in all sects face.
Q
Mike, The Washington Post had a story this morning
that it's being said that Mack McLarty is going to leave the
administration after the Summit of the Americas. Is there anything
to that?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, you know, Mack has extended his stay
here at the President's request and done an extraordinarily good job
as an ambassador and envoy in that region. The President knew that
1997 would be a very significant year for our policy in Latin America
and I think, using his powers of persuasion, encouraged Mr. McLarty
to remain here so that he could help lead the agenda that we pursued
last year Now, that was all about preparing -- doing the work that
we did in the President's travels through a lot of our other
diplomacy last year to prepare us for the second Summit of the
Americas in Santiago coming up in a few months.
What Mr. McLarty's plans will be beyond that will be up
to him. But I know that he probably yearns for the life that he
thought he was going to get after the end of the first term and as
the President managed to subvert by getting him to stay.
Q
In other words, he's leaving. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: I think I said that very elegantly.
(Laughter.) You'd have to check with him.
Speaking of the President's powers of persuasion,
has he had any luck convincing Senator Feinstein to run for governor
of California?
MR. MCCURRY: I think he thinks very highly of her. But
if they talked recently and had a conversation about -- talked to her
recently and had a conversation about politics in California, I
imagine that he would want me to keep it between the two of them.
But were she to run, his efforts out there would be
pretty --
MR. MCCURRY: I think that people who know politics in
California say nothing but that she would be a very strong candidate.
How about Panetta?
Can you confirm that the President's deposition
with Paula Jones' attorneys will not be taken here at the White
House?
MR. MCCURRY: I can't say anything about that subject.
Well, if the President were to travel from the
White House grounds on Saturday, am I correct that a travel pool
would necessarily go with him?
MR. MCCURRY: Usually, when he tries to travel around
here people know about it pretty quickly, so I imagine they would.
Q
Mike, one loose end on Iraq. If the American team
MR. MCCURRY: Without necessarily saying that's what is
going to happen. I don't, frankly, know the answer and I'm not even
sure that there is an answer at this point. But the court would be
the only one who would properly determine what kind of public comment
can be made.
Well, our information is flatly it has been decided
it will not be here at the White House.
MR. MCCURRY: You're giving out the scoop in public?
What are you doing?
Q
This isn't a big scoop. It's not like a big huge
story -- don't you think?
MR. MCCURRY: I personally don't think so. But I'll
leave you to make your own judgment. (Laughter.)
Q
Has the President seen or talked to Bennett lately?
MR. MCCURRY: He's talked to him from time to time.
I
don't know -- I mean, they've had to have talked during this
discovery period.
Q
But doesn't he have to prepare for a deposition?
MR. MCCURRY: Normally, if you're going to give a
deposition, you prepare with your attorney. I can't imagine the
President wouldn't.
Q
How did the President react to being in the same
room with Paula Jones?
MR. MCCURRY: His attorney has addressed that. I don't
really have anything to add to what he said.
Q
Did you find out if Robin Williams was at Camp
David with the President this weekend?
MR. MCCURRY: I do believe that's true. And I think
they were up with some of the other cast members. And the President
and the First Lady are going to be doing some more entertaining and
socializing up there. So I wouldn't be surprised if they go up from
time to time.
Q
Why?
MR. MCCURRY: The main reason is they want to use --
they want to make more use of Camp David. They found it hard go up
there when their daughter was still here because she'd be away from
her friends and they didn't use it as much as they'd like. But they
like being up there. I imaging they'll go up there more often.
Q
Do you know what other members of the cast joined
Robin Williams?
MR. MCCURRY: No, and I'm not -- to be honest with you,
I think the President is entitled to invite who he wants to go up
there to be his private social guests and I don't intend to report on
the guest list on such occasions.
Q
Why?
MR. MCCURRY: Because I think it's just good -- I mean,
they do -- they have during -- when they screen movies and do stuff
over at the residence all the time and we don't pester them about it
and I don't intend to.
Q
Well, just to tie up a loose end on that for
interest of those who watch Show Biz Today -- (laughter) --
MR. MCCURRY: What time does that come on? (Laughter.)
When's that on?
Q
It comes on at 5:30 p.m. Eastern. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: At 5:30 p.m. Eastern. (Laughter.)
Q
What time is that Central Time? (Laughter.)
Q
Are you anchoring that now? (Laughter.)
No, I'm not. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: You never know, Wolf, they might have
already announced it. (Laughter.)
Q
To the best of my knowledge. Do they have a movie
theatre at Camp David? Where do they watch these kinds of movies at
Camp David?
MR. MCCURRY: They have -- I think they do. I defer
that -- I'm sure they do because I think previous Presidents have
very often gone up there and shown movies and that sort of thing.
Q
The Republicans have proposed appropriating money
to fund 100,000 new teaching positions and I'm wondering what the
White House reaction to that is and why you haven't proposed that
yourselves.
MR. MCCURRY: We're in favor of teachers and we are in
favor of thinking about --
Q
-- 100,000 new ones on the street?
MR. MCCURRY: -- thinking about ways in which we might
do it. And, who knows. He's a very clever fellow, that Congressman
Paxon. Maybe he caught wind of some things that we were thinking
about.
Q
Forget McLarty. Are you leaving anytime soon?
MR. MCCURRY: If you let me out of here, I will, yes.
(Laughter.)
Q
No, I mean in the White House staff.
Q
Hold on. Can we just finish the teachers thing?
MR. MCCURRY: No, I dropped a hint there. You've got to
pursue it on your own.
Yes?
Q
The race panel is headed to Phoenix this week where
one of the things they're going to do is take up the concerns of
Native Americans. There's been a lot of criticism that that's late
in coming and incorporating them into the discussion. Can you
comment on that?
MR. MCCURRY: There are many communities that the
President has been reaching out and talking to. In fact, if I'm not
mistaken, John Echohawk is one of the participants in the session
that we're having this afternoon with the President. I think the
President does see this effort to understand and embrace the
diversities in American, one that extends to many, many different
kinds of constituencies and communities. And while there are some
unique aspects to race that involve the relationship between black
and white America, I think we've said all along that the rich
diversity that's going to be America in the 2 st century requires an
approach and a willingness to listen to and hear many, many other
communities. And so the President's session today is one such
opportunity, and there will be others.
Q
Mike, does the President support the DNC's action
over the weekend to allow non-citizen residents in the U.S. to
contribute to the party?
MR. MCCURRY: Yes, he does.
Q
Did he say during the campaign, though, that
contributions ought to be limited to those who can vote in elections?
MR. MCCURRY: He sees, as the DNC said, I think,
yesterday, sees these people as likely potential new voters soon.
Q
Does he feel like he made a mistake a year ago when
he endorsed the DNC's --
MR. MCCURRY: Presidents don't make mistakes, they have
Q
Mistakes are made. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: They have further thinking that is bought
to a subject.
Q
Seriously, Mike, he gave a speech and said --
MR. MCCURRY: No, I think the President agrees with a
lot of what was said yesterday, that the unintended consequences of
that policy has been to make some communities feel like they are not
worthy participants in the political process. And I think the
President feels that was a bad outcome of a policy that was well
intentioned. And when the DNC approached the White House about the
change in the subject, I think the President understood the
rationale.
How much money can he get from them?
MR. MCCURRY: The DNC can tell you more about it. I
don't know.
Q
The United States has had very little luck
convincing the French and the Russians in the Security Council to
take stronger action against Iraq. Is today's incident going to be
something that the United States takes into the Security Council and
uses as an avenue of argument to convince them to take stronger
action now?
MR. MCCURRY: It will certainly be cited by the United
States as reasons why we have to remain very firm and determined in
dealing with the government of Iraq. That is not lost on the
governments of France and Russia and others in the Security Council.
They understand the provocations that Saddam has rendered, and they
also have joined unanimously with the U.N. in supporting Security
Council Resolutions 1134 and 1137. And that remains the stated
position of those governments, and we will continue to work to pursue
the objectives that are expressed in those recent unanimous
declarations of the world community.
Q
But isn't this exactly what the United States
warned the French and the Russians was going to happen if they didn't
take stronger action?
MR. MCCURRY: We've had a number of conversations with
those governments stressing the need to remain resolved and united as
we address this real issue.
Q
There is a line of thinking that Saddam feels more
ability to maneuver this month because of the Muslim holiday of
Ramadan. Would you disabuse him of that notion?
MR. MCCURRY: Yes.
Well said. (Laughter.)
Q
I'm just wondering after today if the President has
run out of items to preview for State of the Union, or are they
planning more --
MR. MCCURRY: No, we've got all kinds of boxes under the
tree.
Q
If you could tell us, is there anything more this
week that he's going to unveil?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't know. What is the status of our
leaks these days? (Laughter.) Let's go call Rahm and find out where
he's -- no, I think there's not -- I'm not anticipating this week
additional discussions of things that have budgetary impact. The
President in the State of the Union is going to be talking about a
lot of things that are fundamentally important to the country. He
will be talking later in the week about race in America and the
struggle for civil rights, and acknowledging some of the heroic
leadership of those that are going to receive the National Medal of
Freedom. And that's the kind of thing that in a sense previews parts
of what I think he wants to lay before Congress in January.
I was talking about policy initiatives.
MR. MCCURRY: In policy initiatives, I'm not aware at
the moment of any, but who knows? You're all good reporters.
On the budget, you said this morning you would look
into the report about the division of the revenues from a national
tobacco settlement --
MR. MCCURRY: What I got back on that was pretty much
the same answer that I gave you when we talked about the general
question of tax incidence that would be reflected in the budget. We
really are not going to be in a position to get into the specifics
until the budget is delivered to Congress in February, although we
would say that we credit the states' attorneys general for the very
important work they did in bringing litigation, and it would stand to
reason that we would want to share the proceeds from any settlement
with the states. But exactly what the percentage would be or how we
would do that, we're not at liberty to discuss until the President
unveils his budget.
Q
So are you saying the Wall Street Journal is wrong,
or just that you're not in a position to confirm --
MR. MCCURRY: No, I sort of said that we weren't going
to confirm what they had.
Q
Can I come back to the DNC for a second? Are you
saying that the President no longer supports a unilateral ban on
this, or any ban?
MR. MCCURRY: I'll direct you to the DNC on that. He is
supportive of the work that they did over the weekend.
Q
The President's position on the acceptance of money
from legal aliens, it's one thing to say we no longer will
unilaterally do it, but still support legislation.
MR. MCCURRY: Legal permanent residents, I believe is
the term we prefer.
Okay. Does he still support legislation that would
ban them, or he no longer supports that either?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't believe that is part of the
pending legislation that we've expressed support for.
He supported it in '96.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, I'll ask him what his views are on
that specific question.
Q
Mike, it's reported today that Dennis Scolabrini
(phonetic), the FBI agent who testified on behalf of Billy Dale at
the Travelgate trial says he was harassed by Clinton aides in
retaliation. What is your response?
MR. MCCURRY: If I understand correctly, that is a
sealed deposition and we'll honor the court's decision to seal
whatever testimony he gave.
Q
On to weapons of mass destruction and proliferation
-- the conference committee has come out with a report talking about
it, saying the problem is worsening, criticizing the White House,
saying a lot of talking really hasn't backed it up. Has the White
House been effective in this?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not familiar with the report. I don't
know specifically what area of concern they raised. But we spent
most of this briefing talking about the various extensive work that
the United States is doing, including the hard work that 37,000 young
men and women are doing in the Gulf to pursue our concerns about
weapons of mass destruction. And I think it's fair to say that
there's not a question in the post-Cold War pantheon of foreign
policy that the President takes more seriously than efforts by
countries that are outliers in the world community to acquire weapons
of mass destruction. We've spent a lot of time on that issue here
and the President certainly has done a lot of hard work on the issue.
But I'll see if anyone knows of the report in particular.
Q
Do you expect the President to address the issue of
employer based pensions prior to the State of the Union?
MR. MCCURRY: Expanding retirement income security
opportunities for Americans, which it increasingly in the next
century is going to depend on shoring up Social Security, making sure
the people have got a variety of private sector based employer
provided pension arrangements, and encouraging Americans to make
their own savings and their own arrangements for retirement. It's
going to be a very real key part of work. We've already done a great
deal to address and underpin the strength of the private sector
pension insurance system and I expect in the -- that we will want to
say some more on that subject. I wouldn't rule out that there will
be a -- some focus on that in the weeks ahead, but I don't know
whether prior to January 27th.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
MR. MCCURRY: Thank you, Helen.
END
158 P.M. EST
#452-01/12
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:29-JAN-1998 17:39:30.00
SUBJECT: fwd: McVeigh Wins Permanent Injunction
TO: paul_yandura ( paul _yandura @ hud.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rsorian ( rsorian @ osaspe.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: palmer1 ( palmer1 @ us.ibm.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: HMolina451 (HMolina451 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey_Levi ( Jeffrey_Levi @ compuserve.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dkinch ( dkinch @ health.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dc ( dc @ nrharural.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: zguerra ( zguerra @ admissions.caltech.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: agarner72 ( agarner72 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ktuerff ( Ktuerff @ 4env.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeff.Trandahl ( Jeff.Trandahl @ clerk.house.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Richard Socarides ( CN=Richard Socarides/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: joneill (joneill @ hrsa.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: MARTINB ( MARTINB @ dmbb.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Marklacy ( Marklacy @ flash.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: gjones ( gjones 1 @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Harveyapc ( Harveyapc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: sean.m.grimes ( sean.m.grimes @ bankamerica.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rdupaix ( rdupaix @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
FYI -
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 01/29/98
05:36 PM
LAGomez @ efaches.navfac.navy.mil
01/29/98 02:56:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya
cc:
Subject: fwd: McVeigh Wins Permanent Injunction
Original Text
From: <[email protected]>, on 1/29/98 2:31 PM:
To:
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT:
Kevin
Winston
January 29, 1998
(202) 667-0901
Rich Klein
(212) 969-3061
JUDGE GRANTS PERMANENT INJUNCTION
PREVENTING DISCHARGE OF CHIEF OF BOAT
Ruling Marks First Time Court Rules That Navy Violated Limits on
Investigations
Under ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell, Don?t Pursue?
WASHINGTON, DC - Later today, District Judge Stanley Sporkin of the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia will issue a permanent
injunction
preventing the discharge of Senior Chief Petty Officer Timothy R. McVeigh.
The Navy reserves the right to appeal the injunction to the D.C. Circuit
Court
of Appeals.
C. Dixon Osburn, Co-Executive Director of Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, stated, ?This is a huge victory for McVeigh. What Judge Sporkin?s
ruling means is that after reviewing the merits of the case, he has
determined
that the Navy violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act as well as
the limits on investigations under ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell, Don?t Pursue.?
This is the first time that a federal court judge has said that the Navy
has
failed to follow its own rules and regulations under ?Don?t Ask, Don?t
Tell,
Don?t Pursue.??
McVeigh, who was recommended for discharge because he allegedly used the
word
?gay? to describe his marital status on an America Online user profile,
filed
a lawsuit last week against the government. His suit claims that the Navy
unlawfully obtained information about him from America Online without a
warrant or court order as required by the 1986 Electronic Communications
Privacy Act (ECPA), and breached the limits on investigations under the
Pentagon?s ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell, Don?t Pursue? policy.
In a ruling granting the preliminary injunction on Monday, January 26,
1998,
Judge Sporkin, a Reagan appointee, stated, ?The Navy violated the very
essence
of ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Pursue? by launching a search and destroy mission.?
Judge
Sporkin further stated in his ruling, ?Suggestions of sexual orientation in
a
private, anonymous email account did not give the Navy a sufficient reason
to
investigate to determine whether to commence discharge proceedings. In its
actions, the Navy violated its own regulations.?
With respect to the merits of McVeigh?s claim that the military solicited a
violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act by AOL, Judge
Sporkin
warned that in the era of ?big brother? it is incumbent on the federal
government to observe all the limits and safeguards to an individual?s
privacy
guaranteed by federal law.
The case, which has caught the attention of the online industry, watchdog,
and
civil rights groups, is the latest in a long line of controversies
surrounding
the military?s policy on gays.
?In granting this permanent injunction, the Court is sending a strong and
clear message that military commanders cannot go snooping for evidence that
troops are gay,? stated Osburn. ?There are limits. And those limits must
be
followed.?
McVeigh?s case was strengthened last week when America Online, after
admitting
that it released McVeigh?s identity to a Naval paralegal, blasted the
military
for flouting Federal law by ignoring proper legal procedures to obtain such
information.
Additionally, the author of the ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell, Don?t Pursue?
policy,
professor Charles Moskos of Northwestern University, after reviewing the
facts
of the case, criticized the military in a declaration filed in federal
court.
?It is my opinion that the Navy violated the ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell? policy
in
the McVeigh case by launching an investigation without there being credible
evidence that Senior Chief McVeigh had engaged in homosexual acts or had
openly stated that he was a homosexual.?
SLDN is a 501(c)(3) organization. All contributions are tax-deductible to
the
extent allowed by law. If you would like to support the work of SLDN in
other
ways, please visit our web site at
http://www.sldn.org/scripts/sldn.ixe?page=helpsldn.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Thu,
29 Jan 1998 14:58:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from storm.eop.gov (storm.eop.gov)
by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879) id <[email protected]> for
[email protected]; Thu, 29 Jan 1998 14:58:22-0500 (EST)
Received: from ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil ([138.145.175.3])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Thu, 29 Jan 1998 14:57:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: by ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil with VINES-ISMTP; Thu,
29 Jan 1998 14:57:25 -0500 (EST)
X-Incognito-SN: 410
From: [email protected], "Letitia A Gomez"@STORM.eop.gov
Errors-to: [email protected]
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Incognito-Version: 4.11.23
END ATTACHMENT
1
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Richard Socarides ( CN=Richard Socarides/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME:17-FEB-1998 16:07:50.00
SUBJECT: Report out Thursday shows 27% increase in 1997 of alleged violations of don't ask, don't tell
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia Apuzzo ( CN=Virginia Apuzzo/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sean P. Maloney ( CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Monica M. Dixon ( CN=Monica M. Dixon/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Maria Echaveste (CN=Maria Echaveste/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ann F. Lewis ( CN=Ann F. Lewis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura S. Marcus ( CN=Laura S. Marcus/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph P. Lockhart ( CN=Joseph P. Lockhart/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael D. McCurry ( CN=Michael D. McCurry/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: KERRICK_D (KERRICK_D @ A1 @ CD @ VAXGTWY [ UNKNOWN D (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sylvia M. Mathews ( CN=Sylvia M. Mathews/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robert N. Weiner ( CN=Robert N. Weiner/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kay Casstevens (CN=Kay Casstevens/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph D Eyer ( CN=Joseph D Eyer/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Stacie Spector ( CN=Stacie Spector/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr ( CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Amy W. Tobe (CN=Amy W. Tobe/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv ( CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: LUZZATTO_A (LUZZATTO_A @ / Al @ CD @ VAXGTWY UNKNOWN ) (NSC)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: John Podesta (CN=John Podesta/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Miriam H. Vogel ( CN=Miriam H. Vogel/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Marjorie Tarmey ( CN=Marjorie Tarmey/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Dawn L. Smalls (CN=Dawn L. Smalls/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [WHO])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
The Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network will release its annual review of
the cases under don't ask. don't tell for 1997 on Thursday. Among other
things, it will again show an increase in alleged violations. They will
be briefing us on the report before its release -- on Wednesday, February
18 at 4pm in room 180 OEOB and you are welcome to attend. We will be
developing talking points after that briefing. DOD is receiving a
separate briefing from them tomorrow.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY (Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:18-FEB-1998 12:43:01.00
SUBJECT: NBC: Nightly News, 2/17/98
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWYLOSTP )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman@eop (Michael Waldman@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop (Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joshua Silverman@EOP (Joshua Silverman@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christa T. Robinson@eop (Christa T. Robinson@eop [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Alison Muscatine@eop ( Alison Muscatine@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason@eop (Julie E. Mason@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel J. Gunia@eop (Daniel J. Gunia@eop [ OA 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeremy M. Gaines@eop ( Jeremy M. Gaines@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul K. Engskov@eop (Paul K. Engskov@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards@eop ( Anne M. Edwards@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven A. Cohen@eop ( Steven A. Cohen@eop [WHO])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY[UNKNOWN
])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO:[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY]
UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv@EOP ( Barry J. Toiv@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling@eop ( Gene B. Sperling@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura D. Schwartz@eop ( Laura D. Schwartz@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Naplan@eop ( Steven J. Naplan@eop [ NSC ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin Moran@eop ( Kevin Moran@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Russell W. Horwitz@eop ( (Russell W. Horwitz@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason S. Goldberg@EOP ( Jason S. Goldberg@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen E. Finney@eop ( Karen E. Finney@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rahm Emanuel@eop ( Rahm Emanuel@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michelle Crisci@eop (Michelle Crisci@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jill M. Blickstein@eop ( Jill M. Blickstein@eop [ OMB 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Message Creation Date was at 18-FEB-1998 11:58:00
NBC Nightly News
Aired on February 17, 1998, 6:30 pm ET
Introduction
Reported by Tom Brokaw
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
President Clinton tells the nation why the United States must take
action
against Saddam and take action soon.
President BILL CLINTON: I want you to hear directly from me what is at
stake
for America in the Persian Gulf.
BROKAW: IN DEPTH tonight, the endgame; what happens if nothing changes
after
a military attack?
Back to the future: This baby boy, born yesterday, seven years after his
twin. How did that happen?
And HOME OF THE BRAVE. A prisoner on a death march in a brutal war.
Thousands die, but a stunning coincidence saved his life.
Announcer: From NBC News world headquarters in New York, this is NBC
NIGHTLY
NEWS with Tom Brokaw.
BROKAW: Good evening.
GRAND JURY IN MONICA LEWINSKY CASE HEARD
FROM FORMER CLINTON AIDE TODAY
Reported by TOM BROKAW
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Meanwhile, the grand jury looking into the president's relationship with
Monica Lewinsky heard today from Steve Gooden, who served for three years
as
Clinton personal aide. Gooden had no comment as he left the courtroom
today.
CLINTON LAWYER'S ASKING FOR DISMISSAL OF PAULA JONES CASE
Reported by TOM BROKAW
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Other news tonight, President Clinton's lawyers are asking a judge to
dismiss
Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit. They say there is no proof that she
was a
victim of job discrimination.
PRESIDENT CLINTON WARNS AMERICAN PEOPLE AND IRAQ OF
WHAT IS TO COME IF DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS ARE NOT SUCCESSFUL
Reported by TOM BROKAW and CLAIRE SHIPMAN
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
President Clinton made his strongest warning yet to Saddam Hussein and
his
strongest argument yet to the American people about why it may be
necessary to
order the military strike against Iraq. But he did stop short on two
important
counts: He didn't talk about the possibility of civilian casualties, and he
failed to set a deadline. After a long run-up, however, it does now
appear that
the critical moment is coming on very fast. NBC's Claire Shipman is at the
White House tonight. Claire:
CLAIRE SHIPMAN reporting:
Tom, that's right, but even after all of the tough talk today, the
United
States just tonight has sanctioned a last-minute diplomatic effort by the
secretary general of the United Nations. The president went to the
Pentagon to
make certain US troops are ready for battle, and to explain to the country
in stark terms what might happen if Saddam Hussein does not back down
and the
US does nothing.
President BILL CLINTON: He will then conclude that he can go right on
and do
more to rebuild an art--an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some
day,
some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal.
SHIPMAN: It was a tough message meant for consumption both at home and
in
Iraq.
President CLINTON: Let there be no doubt we are prepared to act.
SHIPMAN: But as the Clinton administration argued for military action,
the
secretary general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, is prepared for a
last-ditch diplomatic journey to Baghdad. Officials say he's expected to
travel
on Thursday with US support.
Mr. BILL RICHARDSON (US Ambassador to the UN): His mission could be a
positive one, but we reserve the right to an alternative conclusion.
SHIPMAN: But privately, US officials worry his trip might muddy the
situation. NBC News has learned that in a phone call with Kofi Annan
today,
President Clinton told the secretary general that he is in danger of
jeopardizing his strong relationship with the United States and his own
reputation. The president urged Annan not to give any ground on the
authority
of UN weapons inspectors.
But US officials said tonight they do think a diplomatic solution is
more
likely now, if only slightly. They think Annan has heard their concerns,
and
they also say the US might support a compromise proposal--one idea being
discussed, for example, that other diplomats take part in the inspection of
presidential palaces. As long as the real authority remains with the
official
UN weapons inspectors, the US says it might go along.
Now, the Russians are also saying today that the Iraqis may be ready to
back
down, and US officials are interested in that, but they say the Russians
have
been wrong before. And officials here continue to worry that Kofi Annan
might
get dragged into some kind of murky compromise agreement with the Iraqis
that
the US would not support, and so they say the US remains fully prepared to
act
militarily. Tom:
BROKAW: Thanks very much. Claire Shipman at the White House tonight.
ARAB STATES SURROUNDING IRAQ DENYING PUBLIC
SUPPORT TO US DESPITE THEIR SUPPORT IN GULF WAR
Reported by TOM BROKAW and FRED FRANCIS
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
And the United States does continue to have problems with Arab states
in the
Gulf, the same nations that were so supportive during Operation Desert
Storm.
Today, Bahrain, a major staging area for US forces during the war last
time,
said, Not this time.' And NBC's Fred Francis is in Bahrain tonight.
Fred, what's the story there?
FRED FRANCIS reporting:
Well, the Bahrainis got cold feet, at least for the moment, Tom, and
that
hurts the United States politically more than militarily. Politically, one
military officer said that leaves only the aircraft carrier, Kuwait, as
the only
dependable ally. Militarily it doesn't represent a lot. Only 36 war
planes
here at the moment, they can be moved on to Kuwait. In the end, though,
some
feel that the Arabs nation will practice their own version of the
Pentagon's
don't ask, don't tell. If the shooting starts, they will quietly let the
United
States use some of the bases, and they won't talk about it publicly, Tom.
BROKAW: But publicly, why are they so opposed to the idea of using them
now,
Fred?
FRANCIS: Tom, they think that Saddam's only defense is a good offense,
and
they're concerned that tonight Saddam still has some Scud missiles hidden,
and
he may lob those missiles down here. He's done it before, Tom.
BROKAW: All right, thanks very much. Fred Francis tonight in Bahrain,
which--they said, No staging of American military attacks against Iraq this
time.'
If the US attacks, what will really happen to Saddam? We'll have
answers
tonight, IN DEPTH, later on.
And up next, Texas tragedy. A guilty verdict in the cadet love triangle
murder.
Ms. KRISTEN CLARK: It's a shame. It really is. Three lives are
totally
destroyed over nothing.
BROKAW: Once a promising future, including the Naval academy. Now,
life in
prison.
And would you believe this baby is seven and a half years old?
Technically
that's true. We'll tell you how.
AMERICAN MILITARY PLANNERS HAVE DETAILED PLANS OF
PRIMARY TARGETS IN POSSIBLE MILITARY STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ
Reported by TOM BROKAW and JIM MIKLASZEWSKI
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Obviously, American military planners have been working on a plan for a
long
time on what they would hit in Saddam's Iraq. And as NBC's Jim
Miklaszewski
tells us tonight from the Pentagon, they are going after more than just
remote
weapons sites.
Jim, what do you have for us?
JIM MIKLASZEWSKI reporting:
Well, Tom, the US military has already picked out its targets for
possible
air strikes, and it only took seven years to put it all together. Some of
the
most serious military threats to Saddam Hussein are headed for the Persian
Gulf
today. They're not supersonic bombers, they're supersensitive spy planes,
that
would help the American military hit targets that would hurt Saddam
Hussein the
most, intended to destabilize his regime. In fact, for the past seven
years,
since the end of the Gulf War, a high-flying network of surveillance
planes and
spy satellites has photographed nearly every square inch of Iraq and
watched
nearly every move of Saddam's military, giving war planners a clear
picture of
what to expect and what to hit.
General JOHN SHEEHAN (US Marine Corps, Retired): You know what his
Republican
Guard response capability is, you know what kind of surface-to-air
missiles he
has, so you can work that particular problem. So when you do collapse his
command and control, you can do it a lot faster.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Specifically, the US military would go after Saddam's
personal
army, the Republican Guard, his command and control, even secret police
headquarters scattered throughout Iraq. The US has help. In the northern
no-fly zone at Mosul, British intelligence photos reveal one of Saddam's
largest
palace sites, complete with communication facilities and hardened
bunkers. CIA
officials tell NBC News it's a suspected storage site for biological
weapons and
is on the target list. But all that high-tech surveillance is not
foolproof.
Mr. ELIOT COHEN (Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies): If
Saddam, say, suddenly moves a kindergarten into a biological weapons site
a few
hours before a bomb hits, it's very unlikely that our intelligence will
pick
that up.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Former CIA director James Rosey warns that one bombing
campaign
alone will not likely get rid of Saddam.
Mr. JAMES ROSEY: This is not something for which there is likely to be
any
immediate gratification. This is tough.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Now, publicly, Pentagon officials deny that any bombing
campaign would be aimed at overthrowing Saddam. But they admit that the
kinds
of targets selected could in fact help push him from power. Tom:
BROKAW: Thanks very much, Jim Miklaszewski tonight at the Pentagon.
QUESTIONS RAISED AS TO WHETHER US MILITARY
STRIKE WILL HELP OR HURT SITUATION WITH IRAQ
Reported by TOM BROKAW and ANDREA MITCHELL
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
NBC NEWS IN DEPTH tonight. As the US military gears up to hit Iraq, the
question is, what can these American attacks really accomplish? Or is it
mission: impossible? In 1991, Operation Desert Storm cost American
taxpayers $
7.4 billion. American warplanes dropped 88,500 tons of bombs. Of course,
Saddam
was kicked out of Kuwait as a result. And yet today, he remains in power
in
Iraq, still thumbing his nose at UN weapons inspectors and the world. So
what
will happen this time if the US begins bombing? Our IN DEPTH report
tonight on
the endgame from NBC's Andrea Mitchell.
ANDREA MITCHELL reporting:
The US strikes, but then what? When the smoke clears, who will win?
Who
will lose? Scenario number one: Saddam survives, but severely weakened by
the
US bombardment. That's the administration's best hope, except that even in
defeat, Saddam can be very dangerous.
General NORMAN SCHWARZKOPF (Retired Former Gulf War Commander): He was
considerably weakened, very weakened, after the Gulf War. What you saw was
immediate repression within his own country against any elements that
chose to
rise up against him.
MITCHELL: Much more likely, experts say, scenario number two: results
of the
bombing mixed, civilian casualties high, no proof we've taken out the
weapons of
mass destruction. The US declares victory, but loses prestige, and the
economic
sanctions on Iraq crumble.
General SCHWARZKOPF: The United States is going to be viewed by a large
portion of the world as the pariah, and I'm afraid that other nations are
going
to say because the United States has done this, we feel that we can
disregard
the sanctions. And if that happens, Saddam has won.
MITCHELL: Saddam could become even more of a hero elsewhere in the
region, to
young Palestinians, like those demonstrating against the US today in the
West
Bank, and to terrorist organizations like Hamas. And even more of a
menace to
his enemies.
Mr. PAUL WOLFOWITZ (Former Undersecretary of Defense): Every time he
survives something, he sends the message to his enemies, I outlast my
enemies,
and if you are on the wrong list when I'm still around, you'll be in
trouble.'
It's like a mafia don. I mean, it's a power game.
MITCHELL: Least likely of all, scenario number three: the US targets
Saddam
and kills him. But is that really the best outcome?
General SCHWARZKOPF: Even if we got him, his heir apparent, his son, is
considered to be much worse than he is and much more brutal.
MITCHELL: And without Saddam, experts believe Iraq could dissolve into
civil
war, like Lebanon or Bosnia--three warring ethnic groups; Kurds in the
North,
Sunni Muslims in central Iraq, Shiites in the South.
Mr. EDWARD DJEREJIAN (Former Ambassador to Israel and Syria): This
disintegration will threaten Iraq's neighbors--all of its neighbors in the
Gulf--Turkey, Syria, Iran--and could lead to consequences that we simply
cannot
see very clearly.
MITCHELL: Worst of all, even some administration supporters warn the US
won't
get a second chance to attack Iraq if the first air strikes don't get
Saddam or
his weapons. So military and diplomatic experts say the US must hit
Saddam very
hard or not at all. Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (EXTERNAL MAIL)
CREATOR: Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX
CREATION DATE/TIME:18-FEB-1998 11:59:00.00
SUBJECT: NBC: Nightly News, 2/17/98
TO: ABERNATHY_P
(ABERNATHY_P@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: ANDERSON_L
(ANDERSON_L@A1@CD)(WHO).
READ:NOT READ
TO: BERNAL_D
(BERNAL_D@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: BLICKSTEIN J
(BLICKSTEIN_J@A1@CD) (OMB)
READ:NOT READ
TO: COHEN_SA
(COHEN_SA@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: CRISCI_M
(CRISCI_M@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: EDWARDS_A
(EDWARDS_A@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: EMANUEL_R
(EMANUEL_R@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: ENGSKOV_K
(ENGSKOV_K@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: FINNEY_K
(FINNEY_K@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: GAINES_J
(GAINES_J@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: GIBBONS_J
(GIBBONS_J@A1@CD) (STP)
READ:NOT READ
TO: GOLDBERG_JS
(GOLDBERG_JS@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: GREEN_J
(GREEN_J@AI@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: GUNIA_D
(GUNIA_D@A1@CD)(OA)
READ:NOT READ
TO: HILLIARD_B
(HILLIARD_B@A1@CD)(NSC)
READ:18-FEB-1998 13:51:25.52
TO: HOLSTEIN_E
(HOLSTEIN_E@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: HORWITZ_R
(HORWITZ_R@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: KUKIS_H
(KUKIS_H@AI@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: LEWIS_PF
(LEWIS_PF@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: LI_G
(LI_G@A1@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: MARSHA_T
(MARSHA_T@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: MASON_J
(MASON_J@AI@CD)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: MORAN_KI
(MORAN_K1@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: MUSCATINE A
(MUSCATINE_A@A1@CD)(WH0O)
READ:NOT READ
TO: NAPLAN_S
(NAPLAN_S@A1@CD)(NSC)
READ:NOT READ
TO: ODONNELL_T
(ODONNELL_T@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: ROBINSON_C
(ROBINSON_C@A1@CD)(OPD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: SCHAEFER_V
(SCHAEFER_V@A1@CD)(OMB)
READ:NOT READ
TO: SCHWARTZ_L
READ:NOT READ
TO: SILVERMAN_J
(SILVERMAN_J@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: SPERLING_G
(SPERLING_G@A1@CD) (OPD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: STOTT_D
(STOTT_D@A1@CD)(VHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: TABERSKI_D
(TABERSKI_D@A1@CD)
READ:NOT READ
TO: TERZAN_V
(TERZAN_V@A1@CD)(VPO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: TOIV_B
(TOIV_B@AI@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: WALDMAN_M
READ:NOT READ
TO: gamble-bennett
([email protected]@inet)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Brenda M. Anders
( Brenda M. Anders@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Megan C. Moloney
( Megan C. Moloney@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jonathan Murchinson
(Jonathan Murchinson@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Joseph P. Lockhart
( Joseph P. Lockhart@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jake Siewert
(Jake Siewert@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jordan Tamagni
(Jordan Tamagni@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Beverly J. Barnes
( Beverly J. Barnes@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Brian D. Smith
( Brian D. Smith@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: Elizabeth R. Newman
( Elizabeth R. Newman@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Julia M. Payne
(Julia M. Payne@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Julianne B. Corbett
(Julianne B. Corbett@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jeffrey M. Smith
( Jeffrey M. Smith@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: June Shih
(June Shih@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Lowell A. Weiss
(Lowell A. Weiss@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Estela Mendoza
( Estela Mendoza@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jonathan A. Kaplan
(Jonathan A. Kaplan@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jonathan Orszag
(Jonathan Orszag@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr
( Thurgood Marshall Jr@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Kara Gerhardt
( Kara Gerhardt@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Elisabeth Steele
( Elisabeth Steele@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jennifer Ferguson
(Jennifer Ferguson@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Mark D. Neschis
(Mark D. Neschis@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Eleanor S. Parker
( Eleanor S. Parker@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: Matthew I. Fraidin
( Matthew I. Fraidin@OVP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: David K. Chai
( David K. Chai@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Ruby Shamir
(Ruby Shamir@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Nanda Chitre
(Nanda Chitre@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Amy W. Tobe
( Amy W. Tobe@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Lawrence J. Haas
(Lawrence J. Haas@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: David S. Beaubaire
( David S. Beaubaire@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Lisa J. Levin
( Lisa J. Levin@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Peter A. Weissman
( Peter A. Weissman@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: William A. Halter
( William A. Halter@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Eli G. Attie
( Eli G. Attie@OVP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Patricia M. Ewing
( Patricia M. Ewing@OVP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Sara M. Latham
( Sara M. Latham@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: Melissa M. Murray
( Melissa M. Murray@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX )
READ:NOT READ
TO: Jonathan E. Smith
(Jonathan E. Smith@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TEXT:
Message Creation Date was at 18-FEB-1998 11:58:00
NBC Nightly News
Aired on February 17, 1998, 6:30 pm ET
Introduction
Reported by Tom Brokaw
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
President Clinton tells the nation why the United States must take action
against Saddam and take action soon.
President BILL CLINTON: I want you to hear directly from me what is at stake
for America in the Persian Gulf.
BROKAW: IN DEPTH tonight, the endgame; what happens if nothing changes after
a military attack?
Back to the future: This baby boy, born yesterday, seven years after his
twin. How did that happen?
And HOME OF THE BRAVE. A prisoner on a death march in a brutal war.
Thousands die, but a stunning coincidence saved his life.
Announcer: From NBC News world headquarters in New York, this is NBC NIGHTLY
NEWS with Tom Brokaw.
BROKAW: Good evening.
GRAND JURY IN MONICA LEWINSKY CASE HEARD
FROM FORMER CLINTON AIDE TODAY
Reported by TOM BROKAW
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Meanwhile, the grand jury looking into the president's relationship with
Monica Lewinsky heard today from Steve Gooden, who served for three years as
Clinton personal aide. Gooden had no comment as he left the courtroom today.
CLINTON LAWYER'S ASKING FOR DISMISSAL OF PAULA JONES CASE
Reported by TOM BROKAW
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Other news tonight, President Clinton's lawyers are asking a judge to dismiss
Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit. They say there is no proof that she was a
victim of job discrimination.
PRESIDENT CLINTON WARNS AMERICAN PEOPLE AND IRAQ OF
WHAT IS TO COME IF DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS ARE NOT SUCCESSFUL
Reported by TOM BROKAW and CLAIRE SHIPMAN
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
President Clinton made his strongest warning yet to Saddam Hussein and his
strongest argument yet to the American people about why it may be necessary to
order the military strike against Iraq. But he did stop short on two important
counts: He didn't talk about the possibility of civilian casualties, and he
failed to set a deadline. After a long run-up, however, it does now appear that
the critical moment is coming on very fast. NBC's Claire Shipman is at the
White House tonight. Claire:
CLAIRE SHIPMAN reporting:
Tom, that's right, but even after all of the tough talk today, the United
States just tonight has sanctioned a last-minute diplomatic effort by the
secretary general of the United Nations. The president went to the Pentagon to
make certain US troops are ready for battle, and to explain to the country
in stark terms what might happen if Saddam Hussein does not back down and the
US does nothing.
President BILL CLINTON: He will then conclude that he can go right on and do
more to rebuild an art--an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day,
some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal.
SHIPMAN: It was a tough message meant for consumption both at home and in
Iraq.
President CLINTON: Let there be no doubt we are prepared to act.
SHIPMAN: But as the Clinton administration argued for military action, the
secretary general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, is prepared for a
last-ditch diplomatic journey to Baghdad. Officials say he's expected to travel
on Thursday with US support.
Mr. BILL RICHARDSON (US Ambassador to the UN): His mission could be a
positive one, but we reserve the right to an alternative conclusion.
SHIPMAN: But privately, US officials worry his trip might muddy the
situation. NBC News has learned that in a phone call with Kofi Annan today,
President Clinton told the secretary general that he is in danger of
jeopardizing his strong relationship with the United States and his own
reputation. The president urged Annan not to give any ground on the authority
of UN weapons inspectors.
But US officials said tonight they do think a diplomatic solution is more
likely now, if only slightly. They think Annan has heard their concerns, and
they also say the US might support a compromise proposal--one idea being
discussed, for example, that other diplomats take part in the inspection of
presidential palaces. As long as the real authority remains with the official
UN weapons inspectors, the US says it might go along.
Now, the Russians are also saying today that the Iraqis may be ready to back
down, and US officials are interested in that, but they say the Russians have
been wrong before. And officials here continue to worry that Kofi Annan might
get dragged into some kind of murky compromise agreement with the Iraqis that
the US would not support, and so they say the US remains fully prepared to act
militarily. Tom:
BROKAW: Thanks very much. Claire Shipman at the White House tonight.
ARAB STATES SURROUNDING IRAQ DENYING PUBLIC
SUPPORT TO US DESPITE THEIR SUPPORT IN GULF WAR
Reported by TOM BROKAW and FRED FRANCIS
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
And the United States does continue to have problems with Arab states in the
Gulf, the same nations that were so supportive during Operation Desert Storm.
Today, Bahrain, a major staging area for US forces during the war last time,
said, Not this time.' And NBC's Fred Francis is in Bahrain tonight.
Fred, what's the story there?
FRED FRANCIS reporting:
Well, the Bahrainis got cold feet, at least for the moment, Tom, and that
hurts the United States politically more than militarily. Politically, one
military officer said that leaves only the aircraft carrier, Kuwait, as the only
dependable ally. Militarily it doesn't represent a lot. Only 36 war planes
here at the moment, they can be moved on to Kuwait. In the end, though, some
feel that the Arabs nation will practice their own version of the Pentagon's
don't ask, don't tell. If the shooting starts, they will quietly let the United
States use some of the bases, and they won't talk about it publicly, Tom.
BROKAW: But publicly, why are they so opposed to the idea of using them now,
Fred?
FRANCIS: Tom, they think that Saddam's only defense is a good offense, and
they're concerned that tonight Saddam still has some Scud missiles hidden, and
he may lob those missiles down here. He's done it before, Tom.
BROKAW: All right, thanks very much. Fred Francis tonight in Bahrain,
which--they said, No staging of American military attacks against Iraq this
time.'
If the US attacks, what will really happen to Saddam? We'll have answers
tonight, IN DEPTH, later on.
And up next, Texas tragedy. A guilty verdict in the cadet love triangle
murder.
Ms. KRISTEN CLARK: It's a shame. It really is. Three lives are totally
destroyed over nothing.
BROKAW: Once a promising future, including the Naval academy. Now, life in
prison.
And would you believe this baby is seven and a half years old? Technically
that's true. We'll tell you how.
AMERICAN MILITARY PLANNERS HAVE DETAILED PLANS OF
PRIMARY TARGETS IN POSSIBLE MILITARY STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ
Reported by TOM BROKAW and JIM MIKLASZEWSKI
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
Obviously, American military planners have been working on a plan for a long
time on what they would hit in Saddam's Iraq. And as NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
tells us tonight from the Pentagon, they are going after more than just remote
weapons sites.
Jim, what do you have for us?
JIM MIKLASZEWSKI reporting:
Well, Tom, the US military has already picked out its targets for possible
air strikes, and it only took seven years to put it all together. Some of the
most serious military threats to Saddam Hussein are headed for the Persian Gulf
today. They're not supersonic bombers, they're supersensitive spy planes, that
would help the American military hit targets that would hurt Saddam Hussein the
most, intended to destabilize his regime. In fact, for the past seven years,
since the end of the Gulf War, a high-flying network of surveillance planes and
spy satellites has photographed nearly every square inch of Iraq and watched
nearly every move of Saddam's military, giving war planners a clear picture of
what to expect and what to hit.
General JOHN SHEEHAN (US Marine Corps, Retired): You know what his Republican
Guard response capability is, you know what kind of surface-to-air missiles he
has, so you can work that particular problem. So when you do collapse his
command and control, you can do it a lot faster.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Specifically, the US military would go after Saddam's personal
army, the Republican Guard, his command and control, even secret police
headquarters scattered throughout Iraq. The US has help. In the northern
no-fly zone at Mosul, British intelligence photos reveal one of Saddam's largest
palace sites, complete with communication facilities and hardened bunkers. CIA
officials tell NBC News it's a suspected storage site for biological weapons and
is on the target list. But all that high-tech surveillance is not foolproof.
Mr. ELIOT COHEN (Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies): If
Saddam, say, suddenly moves a kindergarten into a biological weapons site a few
hours before a bomb hits, it's very unlikely that our intelligence will pick
that up.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Former CIA director James Rosey warns that one bombing campaign
alone will not likely get rid of Saddam.
Mr. JAMES ROSEY: This is not something for which there is likely to be any
immediate gratification. This is tough.
MIKLASZEWSKI: Now, publicly, Pentagon officials deny that any bombing
campaign would be aimed at overthrowing Saddam. But they admit that the kinds
of targets selected could in fact help push him from power. Tom:
BROKAW: Thanks very much, Jim Miklaszewski tonight at the Pentagon.
QUESTIONS RAISED AS TO WHETHER US MILITARY
STRIKE WILL HELP OR HURT SITUATION WITH IRAQ
Reported by TOM BROKAW and ANDREA MITCHELL
TOM BROKAW, anchor:
NBC NEWS IN DEPTH tonight. As the US military gears up to hit Iraq, the
question is, what can these American attacks really accomplish? Or is it
mission: impossible? In 1991, Operation Desert Storm cost American taxpayers $
7.4 billion. American warplanes dropped 88,500 tons of bombs. Of course, Saddam
was kicked out of Kuwait as a result. And yet today, he remains in power in
Iraq, still thumbing his nose at UN weapons inspectors and the world. So what
will happen this time if the US begins bombing? Our IN DEPTH report tonight on
the endgame from NBC's Andrea Mitchell.
ANDREA MITCHELL reporting:
The US strikes, but then what? When the smoke clears, who will win? Who
will lose? Scenario number one: Saddam survives, but severely weakened by the
US bombardment. That's the administration's best hope, except that even in
defeat, Saddam can be very dangerous.
General NORMAN SCHWARZKOPF (Retired Former Gulf War Commander): He was
considerably weakened, very weakened, after the Gulf War. What you saw was
immediate repression within his own country against any elements that chose to
rise up against him.
MITCHELL: Much more likely, experts say, scenario number two: results of the
bombing mixed, civilian casualties high, no proof we've taken out the weapons of
mass destruction. The US declares victory, but loses prestige, and the economic
sanctions on Iraq crumble.
General SCHWARZKOPF: The United States is going to be viewed by a large
portion of the world as the pariah, and I'm afraid that other nations are going
to say because the United States has done this, we feel that we can disregard
the sanctions. And if that happens, Saddam has won.
MITCHELL: Saddam could become even more of a hero elsewhere in the region, to
young Palestinians, like those demonstrating against the US today in the West
Bank, and to terrorist organizations like Hamas. And even more of a menace to
his enemies.
Mr. PAUL WOLFOWITZ (Former Undersecretary of Defense): Every time he
survives something, he sends the message to his enemies, I outlast my enemies,
and if you are on the wrong list when I'm still around, you'll be in trouble.'
It's like a mafia don. I mean, it's a power game.
MITCHELL: Least likely of all, scenario number three: the US targets Saddam
and kills him. But is that really the best outcome?
General SCHWARZKOPF: Even if we got him, his heir apparent, his son, is
considered to be much worse than he is and much more brutal.
MITCHELL: And without Saddam, experts believe Iraq could dissolve into civil
war, like Lebanon or Bosnia--three warring ethnic groups; Kurds in the North,
Sunni Muslims in central Iraq, Shiites in the South.
Mr. EDWARD DJEREJIAN (Former Ambassador to Israel and Syria): This
disintegration will threaten Iraq's neighbors--all of its neighbors in the
Gulf--Turkey, Syria, Iran--and could lead to consequences that we simply cannot
see very clearly.
MITCHELL: Worst of all, even some administration supporters warn the US won't
get a second chance to attack Iraq if the first air strikes don't get Saddam or
his weapons. So military and diplomatic experts say the US must hit Saddam very
hard or not at all. Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. email
Brad L. Austin to Trey Graham at 13:49:29.00. Subject: RE: This
03/24/1998
Personal Misfile
Friday. (I page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Don't Ask, Don't Tell])
OA/Box Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/28/1998 - 06/25/1998]
2015-0017-F
ab1568
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information |(a)(1) of the PRAJ
b(1) National security classified information |(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) of the PRAJ
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute |(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information |(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information l(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRAJ
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy |(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA|
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Peter A. Weissman (CN=Peter A. Weissman/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 8-APR-1998 10:21:13.00
SUBJECT: April 8 NSC News Summary
TO: Melissa G. Green ( CN=Melissa G. Green/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Forwarded by Peter A. Weissman/OPD/EOP on 04/08/98
10:21 AM
RUBIN_E@A1
04/08/98 08:45:00 AM
Record Type: Record
To: Gene B. Sperling, swanjohnsonfamily @ ibm.net@INET@LNGTWY
cc:
Subject: April 8 NSC News Summary
NATIONAL SECURITY NEWS SUMMARY
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1998
EUROPE/NIS/CANADA
N. IRELAND: Blair flies to Belfast to join peace talks as fatal deadlock
threatens process. Masked gunmen kill man identified as a loyalist
paramilitary member. Mitchell is the "man to trust" for all sides at
talks. (NYT1,3;WP17,24;LAT3;USA1,10;WT11)
FRANCE: Chirac's conservative coalition splits over control of Paris city
government. (WP18)
RUSSIA: Yeltsin pushes for Duma approval of Kiriyenko as prime minister.
(WP19,NYT3,LAT2,USA11)
GERMANY: Tale of one of Germany's secret spymasters is subject of a new
documentary. Kohl faces uphill battle for re-election. Construction
reveals bunkers of Goebbels, others under Berlin. (WP20,NYT6,WT11)
GREECE: Critical comments by Amb. Burns set off debate in Greek
parliament.
(NYT8,USA11,WT11)
NATO: Polls show U.S. public is "acutely uninterested" in outcome of
enlargement ratification vote. (LAT2)
CZECH REP.: Ancient beer-maker goes head-to-head with Anheuser-Busch over
Budweiser name. (LATI)
FRY: Kosovo insurgents are buying weapons in Albania's lawless highlands,
seek "blood revenge." Kosovar leaders reject Belgrade offer of talks.
(WT1,18)
E.U.: Led by Blair, European socialist parties agree on strategy to reach
out to Third World, other nations. (WT11)
ASIA/PACIFIC
INDONESIA: IMF, Jakarta agree on new bailout package allowing resumption
of
loans. (NYT1,WP18,USA/B1,WSJ19)
CHINA: Chinese and Hong Kong governments are exempted from privacy and
anti-discrimination laws. Beijing deports Chinese-American scholar and
human rights activist. As prosperity increases, Chinese tourists are now
a
common sight in other Asian countries. (WP18;NYTI,7;WTI2)
BURMA: SLORC bars visit by Richardson, retaliating for U.S. ban on
officials' visits. (NYT8,WT12)
JAPAN: Probe of central bank corruption uncovers improprieties. New U.S.
Ambassador Foley wins plaudits in Tokyo. Merrill Lynch sets its sights on
dominating Japan's securities market. Citicorp is thriving as haven for
jittery Japanese. Japanese fret that they are being left behind as market
changes. (WP18;NYT10;WSJ1,17,18)
PHILIPPINES: Manila wants U.S. to return bells seized in 1901; Ramos visit
is possible venue. Four-page ad supplement in Washington Times.
(WP21;WT1,suppl.)
MIDDLE EAST/SOUTH ASIA
IRAN: Uproar over jailing of Tehran mayor reveals splits within ruling
regime. Iran releases 5600 Iraqi POWs. (NYT6,USA11,WT11)
MEPP: Israel on alert after soldiers kill Palestinian driver who allegedly
ran a roadblock. Ross will travel to Mideast after Passover; Netanyahu
sending envoy here. (WP18,NYT7,USA11,WT12)
SAUDI ARABIA: Muslims complete final rites of hajj in Mecca. (WP18,LAT2)
EGYPT: Cairo denies persecuting Coptic Christians, opposes Wolf-Specter
bill. (WT12)
SOUTH ASIA: India blames China for selling Pakistan long-range missiles,
says it has them too. (WP18,WT12)
LATIN AMERICA/CARIBBEAN
TRADE: Sen. McCain praises Clinton for working toward hemispheric free
trade, laments failure of fast-track legislation. (WT4)
BRAZIL: Slash and burn agriculture threatens Amazon and the livelihood of
its inhabitants. (WP1)
PARAGUAY: Alleging lack of consular notification, Asuncion seeks to block
Virginia execution. (WP18)
CUBA: Twelve former political prisoners arrive in Canada; some may go on
to
Miami. State, Treasury dispute claim by trade show organizer that it has
permission to organize a show in Cuba. (WP18,USA11)
PANAMA: El Nino is hurting the canal: low water levels and drought bring
restrictions on passage. (WP20)
EL SALVADOR: Relatives of U.S. nuns slain in 1980 are outraged to learn
that officers linked to killing received U.S. residence. (USA10)
MEXICO: Government is nursing its ailing banking system. (WSJ19)
AFRICA
NIGERIA: Protests by poor tribal communities rise against oil development
on coast. (WP17)
RWANDA: Memorial to Tutsi victims of 1994 genocide is dedicated in Kigali.
(WP18)
GLOBAL/DEFENSE/ECON
TWA 800: NTSB urges rewiring of 747 fuel sensors to prevent another
explosion. (NYT1,WP2,LAT1,USA1)
DEFENSE: Secretary Cohen issues revisions to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
policy
on homosexuality. Project on Government Oversight says U.S. military is
overloaded with flag-rank officers. Cohen strongly backs Navy's decision
to discharge a gay sailor. (LATI,USA11,WTI)
ENVIRONMENT: One-eight of all plant species are threatened with
extinction.
(WP1)
U.N./CONGRESS: Rep. Solomon apologizes for saying SecGen Annan should be
horsewhipped. (WP5,USA11)
CTBT: Administration urges Senate to ratify treaty. (NYT7)
INTEL: Ex-wife of CIA spy suspect says the FBI ignored her warnings that
he
needed help. (LATI)
IMMIGRATION: 55,000 applications selected at random for immigration visa
lottery. (USAII)
ADMINISTRATION
KAMEN: Nick Burns is assailed by Greek parliament speaker for acting like
a
Roman governor; foreign minister defends his comments. Anne Luzzatto is
off to the private sector at the end of the month. Adm. Pease is retiring
to work for General Dynamics. Ginny Terzano has also gone private. (WP21)
OPINION
WP: Editorial says the U.S. should put up with U.N. human rights
inspections and criticism of our own performance because it gives us a
useful mechanism for addressing abuses by other countries. Editorial
urges
new legislation to correct problems with asylum procedure reforms in the
1996 immigration law. (22)
NYT: Editorial expresses concern that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has
led to a 67 percent increase in the number of service members forced out
for homosexuality. Editorial says the U.S. needs to encourage Saudi
Arabia to modernize and become more democratic as King Fahd fades from the
scene. Buergenthal op-ed urges the U.S. to come clean about what it knows
about Central America's "dirty wars" of the 1980s. Jessica Stern urges
that we act now to prepare for bioterrorism incidents. (24-25)
LAT: Mann questions how important the Clinton-Yeltsin relationship is when
events are rapidly moving beyond them. Herschensohn says that the ABM
treaty (totally omitting minor considerations like technical feasibility)
is the only stumbling block to fulfillment of Reagan?s vision of an
anti-missile defense. Toffler and Toffler review the implications of a
selective immigration policy that discourages unskilled laborers from
entering the U.S. (5, 11)
WSJ: Editorial calls on Hashimoto to deliver supply-side tax reform, not
tax-cut tokenism. (22)
USA: Editorial says the Administration was wrong to politicize the base
closure process through its privatization efforts in California and Texas,
but that should not be an excuse for Congress to maintain a larger than
necessary defense infrastructure. Weldon's Opposing View calls on the
President to reverse the privatization attempt, then somehow links the
whole issue to too many deployments and a lack of allied burden-sharing.
Shapiro column says INS urgently needs reform but only new leadership can
make it happen. (11,14)
WT: Editorial supports Cohen?s call for additional base closures, while
slamming the President for making the hard sell to Congress even tougher.
Bartlett supports Armey?s opposition to further IMF funding, but
recognizes
it will pass and encourages Treasury to increase IMF oversight. Hackett
calls for passage of full theater missile defense to counteract Iranian
efforts to obtain Russian missile technology. (14-17)
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Mark A. Kitchens (CN=Mark A. Kitchens/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 8-APR-1998 11:28:30.00
SUBJECT: NPR All Things Considered, April 7, 1998
TO: Dag Vega (CN=Dag Vega/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: June Shih ( CN=June Shih/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Terri J. Tingen ( CN=Terri J. Tingen/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Alison Muscatine (CN=Alison Muscatine/OU=WHO/O=EOF @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel J. Gunia (CN=Daniel J. Gunia/OU=OA/O=EOP @ EOP [ OA ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Naplan ( CN=Steven J. Naplan/OU=NSC/O=EOP @ EOP [ NSC ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven A. Cohen ( CN=Steven A. Cohen/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason S. Goldberg (CN=Jason S. Goldberg/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura D. Schwartz ( CN=Laura D. Schwartz/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul K. Engskov ( CN=Paul K. Engskov/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling (CN=Gene B. Sperling/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards ( CN=Anne M. Edwards/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joshua Silverman ( CN=Joshua Silverman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori L. Anderson ( CN=Lori L. Anderson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan E. Smith ( CN=Jonathan E. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sara M. Latham ( CN=Sara M. Latham/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Eli G. Attie (CN=Eli G. Attie/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Peter A. Weissman (CN=Peter A. Weissman/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: David S. Beaubaire ( CN=David S. Beaubaire/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Nanda Chitre ( CN=Nanda Chitre/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: David K. Chai ( CN=David K. Chai/OU=PIR/O=EOP @ EOP [PIR])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Eleanor S. Parker ( CN=Eleanor S. Parker/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jennifer Ferguson ( CN=Jennifer Ferguson/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kara Gerhardt ( CN=Kara Gerhardt/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Orszag ( CN=Jonathan Orszag/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Estela Mendoza ( CN=Estela Mendoza/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey M. Smith ( CN=Jeffrey M. Smith/OU=OSTP/O=EOP @ EOP [ OSTP 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julia M. Payne ( CN=Julia M. Payne/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Brian D. Smith ( CN=Brian D. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jordan Tamagni ( CN=Jordan Tamagni/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph P. Lockhart ( CN=Joseph P. Lockhart/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Megan C. Moloney ( CN=Megan C. Moloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Brenda M. Anders ( CN=Brenda M. Anders/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey A. Shesol ( CN=Jeffrey A. Shesol/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason H. Schechter (CN=Jason H. Schechter/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gordon Li ( CN=Gordon Li/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen E. Finney (CN=Karen E. Finney/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jill M. Blickstein ( CN=Jill M. Blickstein/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Russell W. Horwitz ( CN=Russell W. Horwitz/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason ( CN=Julie E. Mason/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [WHO])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin S. Moran (CN=Kevin S. Moran/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia M. Terzano ( CN=Virginia M. Terzano/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rahm I. Emanuel (CN=Rahm I. Emanuel/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman ( CN=Michael Waldman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv ( CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Darby E. Stott ( CN=Darby E. Stott/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Miriam H. Vogel ( CN=Miriam H. Vogel/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Melissa M. Murray ( CN=Melissa M. Murray/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Patricia M. Ewing ( CN=Patricia M. Ewing/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: William A. Halter ( CN=William A. Halter/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lisa J. Levin (CN=Lisa J. Levin/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Amy W. Tobe (CN=Amy W. Tobe/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ruby Shamir (CN=Ruby Shamir/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Matthew I. Fraidin ( CN=Matthew I. Fraidin/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Mark D. Neschis (CN=Mark D. Neschis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elisabeth Steele ( CN=Elisabeth Steele/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr ( CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan A. Kaplan ( CN=Jonathan A. Kaplan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lowell A. Weiss (CN=Lowell A. Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julianne B. Corbett ( CN=Julianne B. Corbett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elizabeth R. Newman ( CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Beverly J. Barnes ( CN=Beverly J. Barnes/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jake Siewert (CN=Jake Siewert/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Murchinson ( CN=Jonathan Murchinson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: gamble-bennett ( gamble-bennett @ dol.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michelle Crisci ( CN=Michelle Crisci/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
NPR ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, TUESDAY 8:00 pm ET
Clinton Opens National Dialogue on Social Security
Reported by John Ydstie, Kansas City; Robert Siegel, Washington DC
NPR's John Ydstie reports President Clinton travelled to Kansa City today
to
open a "national dialogue" on the future of Social Security. The event was
sponsored by the Concord Coalition and the American Association of Retired
People and featured speakers from both political parties and people with a
variety of positions on reforming the nation's main retirement program.
NOAH ADAMS, HOST: This is ALL THINGS CONSIDERED. I'm Noah Adams.
ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST: And I'm Robert Siegel.
In Kansas City today, President Clinton kicked off a national dialogue on
Social
Security. It's the first of several public events that will address the
long-term problems faced by the nation's retirement system.
In little more than a decade, Social Security will pay out more than it
takes
in. And if trends continue, in the year 2029, the system would only be
able to
pay about 75 percent of promised benefits.
NPR's John Ydstie reports.
JOHN YDSTIE, NPR REPORTER: President Clinton took the stage at Penn Valley
Community College in Kansas City today, and told the audience assembled
that
Americans must fix the roof while the sun is shining. "While the economy
is
strong and the budget is headed for surplus," he said, "Social Security
must be
reformed."
WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If we act now, we can
assure
strong retirement benefits for the baby-boom generation without placing an
undue
burden on children and grandchildren. And we can do it, if we act now,
with changes that will be far simpler easier than if we wait until the
problem is
closer at hand.
YDSTIE: The president came equipped with charts and graphs, depicting the
demographic problems faced by the system as the huge baby boom generation
begins
to retire. One chart showed that in 1960, there were five workers
supporting
every retiree, but in three decades that will change dramatically, said the
president.
CLINTON: If present birth rates and immigration rates and retirement rates
continue, there will be only two people working for every person drawing
Social
Security.
YDSTIE: President Clinton pushed Social Security reform to the top of the
political agenda during his State of the Union speech, with the call to use
projected budget surpluses to save Social Security first.
But the president has offered no specifics on how to solve the problem.
Today,
he offered five general principles he will use to judge any proposal put
forward. First, the president said, the basic
program must not be abandoned. Second, the reform program should be
universal
and fair.
CLINTON: Third, Social Security must provide a benefit that people can
count on.
Regardless of the ups and downs of the economy or the financial markets,
we have
to provide a solid and dependable foundation of retirement security.
YDSTIE: Fourth, said Mr. Clinton, the program must continue to provide
financial
security for disabled and low-income beneficiaries. And fifth, any fix for
Social Security must not bust the budget.
But so far, the president hasn't showed much enthusiasm for an idea that
many
Republicans, and even some Democrats want to pursue: diverting some of the
Social Security payroll tax into private accounts, controlled by
individuals
that could be invested in the stock market.
Republican Senator Rick Santorum pushed that idea at today's forum.
U.S. SENATOR RICH SANTORUM (R-PA); Everyone in American should get an
account
that's their money, that can never be taken away from them, that they can
invest, that they can see the growth in their future, and if they were to
die
prematurely, something they can leave to the next generation, to help them
in
their future
APPLAUSE
YDSTIE: The day-long, forum broadcast nationwide by C-SPAN, came complete
with
highly produced videos, panel discussions, and questions from the
audience. And
the risks and rewards surrounding the idea of private accounts dominated
the
discussion.
Fred Goldberg (ph) who managed an entitlement reform commission for
Congress
argued the risks are worth taking.
FRED GOLDBERG, PAST MANAGER OF REFORM COMMISSION ADDRESSING FUTURE OF
SOCIAL
SECURITY: Yes, private accounts have risks. They are not the silver
bullet.
They are not the panacea. At the end of the day, people may conclude they
don't
work. But if we don't try real hard to make them succeed, we're taking a
pass
on an opportunity of a generation.
YDSTIE: But Gary Burtless (ph), an economist at the Brookings Institution,
cautioned that many Americans might not do a good job of managing their own
retirement funds.
GARY BURTLESS, ECONOMIST, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: I would say whatever
reform we
undertake, we want to avoid setting up a system that is going to rely too
much
on the investment skills and the self- discipline of Uncle Milt and cousin
Flo.
YDSTIE: Joining in during the closing panel discussion, President Clinton
said
that he does not rule out the idea of supplemental private accounts. And
the
president defended his decision not to put forward a plan right now.
CLINTON: What I'm attempting to do here is to avoid announcing a plan,
while we
go through this period first, of educating the whole electorate on -- all
of our
citizens -- on what the facts are, and then eliciting ideas from people to
get
the broadest range of ideas, because if I come out and say well here's
exactly
what I think ought to be done, then that forecloses debate when I'm trying
to
broaden debate.
YDSTIE: And the debate will continue at least through this year, with
three more
regional forums and a White House conference in December. The president
says
next January, he will convene congressional leaders to draft a solution.
NPR ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, Tuesday, 8:00 pm ET
Gay Military Discharges Increase
Reported by Martha Raddatz, Washington, DC; Robert Siegel, Washingto
A Defense Department report says more homosexuals are bein discharged from
the
military today than when the Clinton administration first adopted its
"don't
ask, don't tell" policy. Defense Secretary William Cohen says the increase
might
be due to an increasing number of voluntary statements to commanders by
gays who
want to leave the military. Gay rights advocates see those figures as
evidence
that homosexuals are being outed and ousted in increasing numbers. NPR's
Martha
Raddatz reports.
ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST: A new Pentagon report says the number of people
discharged
from the military because of homosexuality is up significantly in the past
year.
But Defense Secretary William Cohen says the large majority of gays and
lesbians
who are leaving do so voluntarily.
The report is the first review of the "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue
policy" which went into effect in early 1994. The report concludes that
the
overall policy is working. Critics contend that the Pentagon still has a
long
way to go.
NPR's Martha Raddatz reports.
MARTHA RADDATZ, NPR REPORTER: The Pentagon policy towards gays in the
military
is supposed to work as its name implies: don't tell us you're gay and we
won't
ask or try to hunt you down.
Yet since the policy was implemented four years ago, an increasing number
of gay
service members have left the military. Why? According to the report,
very few
commanders are asking; very few are pursing. But a growing number of gays
and
lesbians, in their first year of military service, are telling.
Defense Secretary William Cohen said on NPR today, it's a trend that
caught his
eye.
WILLIAM COHEN, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: Most of them I would say,
that
occurred during 1997, about 80 to 82 percent of those were from statements
that
they were in fact homosexual, and most of that 82 percent was a purely
voluntary
statement. So, more and more appear to be declaring their homosexuality,
and
for that reason are being given administrative discharges.
RADDATZ: These are referred to as "statements cases" where a person
basically
says "I'm gay." Acts cases, where a person is found to have engaged in
homosexual acts, have declined in the military. So, what's behind the
increasing
statements cases? Why would a person join the military and then make a
statement to end his or her career?
The report doesn't address that, according to Pentagon spokesman Ken
Bacon.
KEN BACON, SPOKESMAN, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: We don't know that because
when a
person comes forward and makes a statement, the commander does not then
whip out
a form and say, fill out this form, and explain exactly why you're saying
this.
Are you saying it because you're coming out and you feel this is the right
thing
to do? Or, are you saying it because you have some fear that somebody
else may
be about to make a statement about you?
We don't investigate the statement itself, or the circumstances behind the
statement.
RADDATZ: Which is as big mistake, according to Michelle Beneke (ph),
co-director
of the Service Members Legal Defense Network, a gay- rights group.
If the Pentagon would look behind the statistics, said Beneke, these
statements
cases would reveal a larger problem. Beneke says her group has
represented 258
military members and none voluntarily left the service.
She pointed to the case of Marine Lance Corporal Kevin Smith, who she said
revealed his homosexuality only under pressure, after a physical assault.
MICHELLE BENEKE, CO-DIRECTOR, SERVICE MEMBERS LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK: He was
gay-bashed. He was afraid to tell his military command for fear they
would use
that report to start an investigation against him. He was afraid even to
report
it to civilian police. Somehow, his command learned of the attack and as he
feared, their response was to interrogate him about his sexual orientation.
They showed no concern to catch the perpetrators.
Kevin Smith is counted as a statements case.
RADDATZ: The Pentagon has no plans to look further into the reasons behind
the
various statements cases cited. But Secretary Cohen is making a number of
changes in implementing the policy. Among them: commanders will now be
told to
check with higher legal authorities before launching an investigation into
a
person's sexual orientation; and the Pentagon will have tighter rules on
plea
bargaining, where the accused offers to reveal the name of gay service
members.
There will also be more training given to investigators who review cases
to make
sure there are no witch hunts.
Pentagon spokesman Ken Bacon was asked why the department is making
changes if
the policy is working as well as he says. To that, Bacon said, "there are
very
few policies in the U.S. government that can't be improved."
Martha Raddatz, NPR News, Washington.
NPR ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, TUESDAY 8:00 pm ET
McCaffrey in Mexico
Reported by Phillip Davis, Mexico City; Robert Siegel, Washington DC
NPR's Phillip Davis reports from Mexico City on high-leve talks between
U.S. and
Mexican authorities to combat drug smuggling. U.S. representatives at the
talks
have proposed new measures for tracking the success or failure of anti-drug
efforts.
ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST: This is ALL THINGS CONSIDERED. I'm Robert Siegel.
NOAH ADAMS, HOST: And I'm Noah Adams.
Today in Mexico, U.S. drug policy chief Barry McCaffrey praised that
country's
efforts to fight drug trafficking. McCaffrey said a new plan for the U.S.
and
Mexico to cooperate on fighting drugs could provide more evidence of
progress.
From Mexico City, NPR's Phillip Davis has the story.
PHILLIP DAVIS, NPR REPORTER: In general, McCaffrey gave a glowing review of
Mexico's efforts to eradicate drug smuggling in that country. But that
view is
not universally shared by the U.S. Congress. It's passed a law requiring
that
the White House investigate Mexico each year, before certifying whether or
not
that country is cooperating fully on the war on drugs.
It's a process Mexico deeply resents. McCaffrey says he has a new plan,
developed over the past year in the United States, that when implemented
will
provide ongoing progress reports to both countries on efforts to stop drug
smuggling, as well as money laundering and arms trafficking.
BARRY MCCAFFREY, U.S. DRUG POLICY CHIEF: We do believe, many of us, that
that
evidence -- the reality of genuine progress over time will make irrelevant
the
U.S. process of certification.
DAVIS: McCaffrey and Mexican officials say their goal is ambitious: to cut
drug
use in half in both countries over the next 10 years.
Phillip Davis, NPR News, Mexico City.
NPR ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, Tuesday, 8:00 pm ET
Yeltsin Meets with Kremlin
Reported by Andy Bowers, Moscow; Robert Siegel, Washington DC; Noa
NPR's Andy Bowers reports on today's round-table meeting at th Kremlin
between
Russian President Boris Yeltsin and parliamentary opponents. Some deputies
signaled their willingness to endorse Mr. Yeltsin's choice for Prime
Minister,
Sergei Kiriyenko. However, the leader of the Communist Party, the dominant
party in the lower house, is determined to vote down the Kiriyenko
nomination
when it comes up for a vote on Friday.
ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST: In Russia, today, President Boris Yeltsin appealed to
lawmakers to confirm his controversial choice of a new prime minister.
Yeltsin
and his political opponents gathered at a Kremlin roundtable meeting to
share
views on the nomination of 35- year-old Sergei Kiriyenko.
As NPR's Andy Bowers reports, the meeting does not seem to have changed
many
minds.
ANDY BOWERS, NPR REPORTER: Yeltsin looked healthy and relaxed today as he
welcomed some of his most bitter rivals to the Kremlin. The guest list
included
the man Yeltsin defeated in the last presidential race, communist leader
Gennady
Zyuganov, as well as the heads of all the other major parties.
They came to tell the president who they'd like to see in a new cabinet,
and to
judge the political neophyte Yeltsin has tapped to fill the number two job
in
Russia. Yeltsin didn't have to hold such a meeting. He agreed last week,
as a
goodwill gesture in what's becoming a difficult confirmation battle.
And today, he offered another small olive branch. He told the gathering
that
1998 should be a non-confrontational year. "I don't veto; you don't
reject," he
said with a grin. "Let's give it a try."
But the communists seem bent on confrontation. They're demanding to be
part of
a coalition government -- an idea Yeltsin rejected today.
BORIS YELTSIN, PRESIDENT, RUSSIAN FEDERATION (VIA TRANSLATOR): No, no -- I
will
agree to a government of business-like people offered by any Duma faction,
but
never say that I agreed to a coalition government.
BOWERS: When he unexpectedly fired his old prime minister and cabinet two
weeks
ago, Yeltsin angered many Duma members by acting, they said, like a tsar --
demanding his nominee be approved and threatening lawmakers.
Today, he sounded much softer, saying the whole country will lose out if it
continues to operate without a cabinet much longer. And although he didn't
raise the issue, Yeltsin watchers also point out that without a prime
minister,
it isn't clear who would take over the presidency if Yeltsin were to die
in the
next few weeks.
After the roundtable, some lawmakers said they will now support Kiriyenko
on the
first vote this Friday. But communist leader Zyuganov seemed unmoved by
Yeltsin's appeal.
GENNADY ZYUGANOV, COMMUNIST PARTY LEADER (VIA TRANSLATOR): Government
policy
should be formed by an experienced, educated person who has practical
management
skills. As far as Kiriyenko is concerned, he'd be a good deputy prime
minister.
We are going to vote against.
BOWERS: But many parties, and even some communists, are refusing to shut
the
door on Kiriyenko altogether, suggesting there could be a fair amount of
backroom dealing before Friday's vote.
Andy Bowers, NPR News, Moscow.
NPR MORNING EDITION
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, TUESDAY 10:00 am ET
Russian Politics
Reported by Andy Bowers, Moscow; Bob Edwards, Washington, DC
Host Bob Edwards talks with NPR's Andy Bowers about Russia President Boris
Yeltsin's efforts to form a new cabinet. Yeltsin sacked Prime Minister
Victor
Chernomyrdin's government on March 23 and nominated Sergei Kiriyenko to
replace
him.
BOB EDWARDS, HOST: Russia's President Boris Yeltsin today continues his
efforts
to win parliamentary approval of his choice for prime minister. He's
meeting
with his political opponents to discuss the selection of Sergei Kiriyenko
to
assume the post.
Yeltsin fired former premier Viktor Chernomyrdin two weeks ago, and has
threatened to dismiss parliament and call new elections if Kiriyenko is not
confirmed. A vote is set for Friday.
NPR's Andy Bowers is in Moscow. Andy, who's involved in these discussions
and
what's the significance of the talks?
ANDY BOWERS, NPR REPORTER: Well, it's the heads of all the major parties
in the
Duma, the lower house of parliament, plus leaders from the upper house, the
Federation Council, some union officials and Kremlin officials.
Basically, Yeltsin has agreed just to hear their views about his choice for
prime minister and about the makeup of the rest of the cabinet. Yeltsin is
under no legal obligation to act on what he hears today.
The Duma can only vote up or down on the choice for prime minister and
they have
no vote at all on the other members of the cabinet. But, Yeltsin had been
just
barrelling ahead with this nomination, showing no signs that he really
cared
what lawmakers thought until last week, their outcry just became too loud.
And Yeltsin finally agreed to postpone the vote on Kiriyenko by a week,
and to
hold today's round table. Whether that's going to be enough to win over
the
lawmakers is a very big question.
EDWARDS: So, this meeting is largely a face-saving gesture?
BOWERS: That's right, it is. The Duma leaders were very angry at being
told
that they had to approve this relatively unknown junior minister, who's
been in
government for less than a year, or else Yeltsin would dissolve
parliament.
The leaders of a party such as the communists say Kiriyenko is just too
inexperienced, he's unknown, and they want at least a little more time to
get to
know him.
Yeltsin apparently decided that his threats weren't achieving what he
wanted, so
he gave in a little bit and agreed to this meeting. But neither side has
really
changed its position, at least publicly.
The communists say they will continue to oppose Kiriyenko until the end,
even if
Yeltsin does dissolve parliament and Yeltsin says he's going to push ahead
and
that he won't even accept a coalition government -- coalition cabinet with
the
communists.
EDWARDS: Yeltsin going to get his way?
BOWERS: It's very hard to guess right now. It's clear that neither
Yeltsin nor
the Duma leaders really want to hold new elections at the moment.
So, that would suggest that there will be a compromise before it goes that
far.
In the past, Yeltsin has usually come out on top of standoffs like this
and many
analysts believe that in the end, he will again.
But members of the Duma from all parties, not just the communists, but even
parties that generally support Yeltsin, seem ready to drag this out at
least for
awhile. They probably want to get as many concessions as they can from
Yeltsin,
and those concessions might be in the form of appointments to a new
cabinet.
EDWARDS: Now, there was a court ruling yesterday that blocks Yeltsin from
returning to Germany priceless artwork seized by the Red Army during World
War
II. What do you know about that?
BOWERS: This is a very interesting decision, Bob. This is about works of
art,
and also archives and things like that, Soviet troops took from Germany and
other Nazi-occupied countries after the war.
For decades, the Soviets even denied that they had this trophy art. But
much of
it has now come to light, and some of it's even hanging in museums here in
Russia.
Yeltsin wants to give the art back because he wants good relations with
Germany
and with other European countries. But parliament, the Duma, has passed a
bill
saying that Russia will keep it, basically nationalize all of it.
Yeltsin vetoed the bill and Parliament the overrode his veto, then Yeltsin
appealed to the constitutional court which yesterday said that he has to
sign
the bill.
So, this is as much about democracy in Russia as it as about the art
itself.
EDWARDS: NPR's Andy Bowers in Moscow.
NPR ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Aired on APRIL 7, 1998, TUESDAY 8:00 pm ET
Cuba Threat Assessment Overdue
Reported by Tom Gjelten, Washington, DC; Robert Siegel, Washington DC
HIGHLIGHT:
NPR's Tom Gjelten reports that the Pentagon has delayed releas of an
assessment
of the military threat Cuba presents to the United States. According to
those
who have seen it, the report concludes that Cuba's conventional military
forces
no longer seriously threaten U.S. security. Military officials say they
are more
concerned about the possibility of civil unrest in Cuba, a situation which
could
lead to an outflow of refugees and even require a U.S. military
intervention.
The Pentagon's somewhat dove-ish tone has angered Cuban-American members of
Congress, and administration officials are considering possible revisions
to the
report.
NOAH ADAMS, HOST: The Pentagon is a week overdue in releasing an
assessment of
the military threat Cuba presents to the U.S. Officials familiar with the
report say it downplays the strength of the Cuban military and concludes
that
Cuba no longer represents a serious threat to U.S. security.
The report is mandated by Congress. It was supposed to be delivered last
Tuesday. Leaders of the Cuban-American community objected to the report in
advance, and Defense Secretary William Cohen said last week he wants to
review
the document before releasing it. Administration officials now say the
Pentagon
report may be revised before it is sent to Congress.
We have more from NPR's Tom Gjelten.
TOM GJELTEN, NPR REPORTER: The Pentagon's conclusions are classified, but
the
senior U.S. military officers who prepared the report have already made
clear
their view that Cuba no longer represents a serious threat to U.S.
security.
That's also the assessment of retired Marine General John Sheehan (ph), who
until last year headed the U.S.-Atlantic Command. Sheehan, whose area of
responsibility included Cuba, says the Cuban armed forces were downsized
after a
cutoff of military aid from the Soviet Union.
GENERAL JOHN SHEEHAN (RET.), U.S. MARINE CORPS, FORMER HEAD, U.S.-ATLANTIC
COMMAND: When that aid stopped in '89-90, what you saw happening is Cuba
being
forced to deal in the international market in hard currency, which meant
there
was less money for the military. So you could just see the Cuban military
starting to shrink, adjust how it saw the world. And went from, what I
would
call kind of an internationalist policy, where the use of force was part of
their foreign policy, to a policy now of home defense, internal concerns
only.
GJELTEN: Sheehan argues that the United States has a stake in seeing that
Cuba
has a peaceful political transition once the communist regime there is
finished.
From the U.S. military's point of view, Sheehan says, one danger in Cuba
is that
a political crisis in the communist regime there could provoke civil unrest
which would then result in widespread repression. Under that scenario,
Sheehan
says, Cuba could suddenly become a problem for the U.S. military.
SHEEHAN: My chief concern is that an event may occur -- an event that,
from an
international news perspective and from a Miami perspective, would kind of
reinforce all the negative images. And there would be a great hue and cry
for
U.S. intervention. That is the worst-case scenario that I can think of.
GJELTEN: Senior U.S. military officers on active duty will not comment on
the
Pentagon report until it's released. But Republican Congresswoman Iliana
Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, who has met with the authors of the Pentagon
report,
says it mirrors Sheehan's analysis that Cuba is no longer a threat to the
United
States -- at least in conventional terms. She and other Cuban-American
members
of Congress have already rejected the report.
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE ILIANA ROS-LEHTINEN (R-FL): We see this more as a
political
move, rather than a military assessment. We see this as a step in the
direction
that the Clinton administration has wanted to undertake for some time,
which is
to normalize relations. And they're willing to even bend -- bend the
facts to
get to that -- what they would think is the most beneficial strategy.
GJELTEN: Ros-Lehtinen, and other members of Congress who are criticizing
the
Pentagon report, say they want it to address the unconventional security
threats
in Cuba, such as the possibility of a biological warfare capability,
espionage
activity, or ties to international drug trafficking.
The negative reaction to the Pentagon report on Cuba from the
Cuban-American
community and their supporters in Congress has been so strong, in fact,
that
Defense Secretary William Cohen is holding up the report. Its somewhat
dove-ish
conclusions don't entirely fit the prevailing analysis of Cuba in the U.S.
government.
One senior administration official said the Pentagon report could be
revised in
order to make sure the administration "speaks with one voice." That is
always a
challenge, he said, and especially in the case of Cuba, which is, he said
"a
sensitive and politically controversial issue."
General Sheehan, who has spoken out often on the need to move toward more
normal
relations with Cuba, has meanwhile found himself targeted for criticism by
the
Cuban-American community.
SHEEHAN: From their perspective, you know, I'm probably a threat to their
ideology. Within the U.S. military, those that look at Cuba on a rational
basis, I think, come to the same conclusion that Cuba is not a military
threat
to the United States, and we need to figure out we get on with the next
phase of
our relationship as a nation.
GJELTEN: Sources at the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill now say the report on
Cuba's threat to the United States is unlikely to be delivered until
Congress
returns from its Easter recess.
Tom Gjelten, NPR News, Washington.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Todd A. Summers ( CN=Todd A. Summers/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME: 9-APR-1998 10:25:57.00
SUBJECT: Re: Sullivan Op-Ed on Gays in the Military report by pentagon
TO: Virginia Apuzzo ( CN=Virginia Apuzzo/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
The needle article was good - cuts the legs off of one of McAffrey's
principal arguments. FYI, confidentially, the COS is now on a call with
Dr. Hitt.
Todd
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Todd A. Summers (CN=Todd A. Summers/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 9-APR-1998 08:55:13.00
SUBJECT: Sullivan Op-Ed on Gays in the Military report by pentagon
TO: Daniel W. Burkhardt (CN=Daniel W. Burkhardt/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel C. Montoya (CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Philip G Dufour ( CN=Philip G Dufour/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen Tramontano (CN=Karen Tramontano/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven W. Adamske ( CN=Steven W. Adamske/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Miguel M. Bustos CN=Miguel M. Bustos/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elizabeth J. Potter ( CN=Elizabeth J. Potter/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sean P. Maloney ( CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia Apuzzo CN=Virginia Apuzzo/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Relates to the discussion we had in our senior glbt appointees meeting.
Not very flattering.
April 9, 1998
Undone by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
By ANDREW SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON -- "I think it's working," said Defense Secretary William
Cohen, referring to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay
members of the armed services. He said this while announcing that
discharges of homosexuals have increased by 67 percent since 1994. When
you factor in the military's downsizing, the real figure is closer to 80
percent. If this is Mr. Cohen's definition of success, one wonders what
failure would look like.
The real picture is actually grimmer. Although "don't ask, don't tell"
forbids military commanders from pursuing investigations of suspected
homosexual conduct without compelling evidence, violations of the policy
not to ask, pursue or harass homosexuals have soared, according to the
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the only watchdog group tracking
discharge cases under this policy.
The organization has documented 563 violations by military authorities of
"don't ask, don't tell" in 1997, a jump from 443 violations in 1996.
Reported cases of physical and verbal harassment of gay service members
rose 38 percent from 1996 to 1997; cases in which military authorities
illegally "asked" troops if they were gay increased 39 percent.
Until August of last year, the military was still even using enlistment
forms that directly asked about a person's sexual orientation. In its
report, the Pentagon said the original form was preserved for four years
"as a cost savings measure."
Witch hunts have continued. In 1996, an airman convicted of forcible
sodomy at Hickam Air Force Base had a life sentence reduced to 20 months
in return for outing 17 other allegedly gay servicemen. All the accused
air force men were discharged; the rapist served less than a year.
Secretary Cohen's improbable defense is that the vast majority of
discharges were voluntary. The proof? None in the Pentagon report, except
for this: "The Services believe that most of the [cases involving a
disclosure of homosexuality]- although not all of them -- involve
service members who voluntarily elected to disclose their sexual
orientation to their peers, supervisors or commanders."
That's what it comes down to: "the Services believe The report
later concedes that "because extensive inquiries or investigations are not
conducted in most of these cases, the reasons for [the increase in
numbers] are not known and would be difficult to ascertain." Compare this
with the documentation of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
The Pentagon further claimed that 80 percent of discharges were
"statement" cases, implying that individuals were discharged after
spontaneously declaring their orientation to their superiors. But that is
misleading at best. All that a "statement" case means is that the grounds
for discharge arose from what a service member allegedly said, and not
what he or she did.
Such "statements" can include private confessions to therapists, friends,
peers or family members that were subsequently reported to military
authorities.
I asked Michelle Benecke, co-director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, how many of the 1,300 people her group has helped in the last
four years have truly voluntarily disclosed their orientation. "None that
I've come across," she said.
To its credit, the Pentagon does admit in its report that it has a
problem. While insisting that the policy is "generally being implemented
properly," the military concedes that it has not been vigilant enough in
policing anti-gay harassment. As it now stands, someone attacked for being
gay cannot report the abuse without risking discharge as a result.
The report also acknowledges that some women have been intimidated into
not reporting sexual harassment, because they are sometimes accused of
being lesbians if they reject male advances. More needs to be done to
inform commanders of the regulations, the report adds.
These admissions would be more encouraging if the record was not so
damning. Last year, despite the 563 reported violations of "don't ask,
don't tell," not a single military commander was disciplined for
misconduct.
It's now clear that the policy has not simply failed. It is far worse than
what went on before. Gay service members are now allowed into the
military, only to face a series of tripwires intended to flush them out.
They have become, in effect, the unintended bait of rogue military
commanders. Other, more decent officers (and there are many) simply do not
know the rules, since the Pentagon has done a poor job of telling them.
What to do about this? The Pentagon has embraced a mix of spin, denial and
confession. The President has other options. Last year, he denounced
employment discrimination against homosexuals. But as Commander in Chief,
Bill Clinton has now fired more homosexuals than any other employer in
America. Is it too much to ask that this President finally live up to his
own words? Or with this President, is that now utterly beside the point?
Andrew Sullivan, a senior editor at The New Republic, is the author of the
forthcoming "Love Undetectable."
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Virginia Apuzzo ( CN=Virginia Apuzzo/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 9-APR-1998 09:12:00.00
SUBJECT: Re: Sullivan Op-Ed on Gays in the Military report by pentagon
TO: Todd A. Summers ( CN=Todd A. Summers/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
saw it, had the same thought, thanks--needle exchange below it wasn't
bad
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME:10-APR-1998 08:57:02.00
SUBJECT: fwd: DoD Report Update
TO: paul_yandura ( paul_yandura @ hud.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeff.Trandahl ( Jeff.Trandahl @ clerk.house.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: msmolinski ( msmolinski @ osophs.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: palmerl ( palmerl @ us.ibm.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: HMolina451 ( HMolina451 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: MARTINB (MARTINB @ dmbb.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: clord ( clord @ aidsaction.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Marklacy ( Marklacy @ flash.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kelly_wilson_kent (kelly_wilson_kent @ HUD.GOV @ inet [ UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kkavanaugh (kkavanaugh @ nccbuscc.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dc (dc @ nrharural.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: zguerra ( zguerra @ admissions.caltech.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: agarner72 ( agarner72 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rdupaix ( rdupaix @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bcrow ( Bcrow @ worldbank.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ktuerff ( Ktuerff @ 4env.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rsorian ( rsorian @ osaspe.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: texjmp ( texjmp @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: joneill (joneill @ hrsa.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmartin ( mmartin @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: markeyop ( markeyop @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey Levi ( Jeffrey_Levi @ compuserve.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dkinch ( dkinch @ hotmail.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pkawata ( pkawata @ nmac.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: gjones ( gjones 1 @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dharvey ( dharvey @ aidspolicycenter.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: sean.m.grimes ( sean.m.grimes @ bankamerica.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dan.eckhardt ( dan.eckhardt @ mci.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pddfcaa ( pddfcaa @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gonzaloa ( Gonzaloa @ poz.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
fyi -
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 04/10/98
08:56 AM
LAGomez @ efaches.navfac.navy.mil
04/09/98 05:43:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya
cc:
Subject: fwd: DoD Report Update
FYI
Original Text
From: "SLDNI" <[email protected]>, on 4/9/98 4:40 PM:
To:
April 9, 1998
Greetings. Thank you if you have already responded to our last action
alert
by contacting the Secretary of Defense, Vice President and President. If
you
have not had the opportunity to do so, please weigh in now. Its important.
Message points and contact info are below. Now, here's the latest on the
Pentagon review.
The Pentagon has officially released its review of Don't Ask, Don't Tell,
Don't Pursue. If we were grading the report, we would give the
recommendations a "B." They address many, though not all, of our concerns.
In particular, the Pentagon will instruct commanders that anti-gay
harassment
will not be tolerated and they will reissue the Dorn memo we obtained last
year telling commanders to investigate reported harassment, not those who
are
victimized by it. Commanders will be instructed to seek guidance from
higher
headquarters before beginning investigations and they will be evaluated
during
their yearly command climate assessments on whether they are training their
units on da,dt,dp. These are good first steps.
However, we would give the Pentagon an "F" for the false and misleading
rhetoric they have employed in the press, where they have asserted with no
basis whatsoever that the significant increase in gay discharges last year
--
up to 997 from 850 the year before -- is due to people who come out in
order
to avoid their service obligation. This is not contained in the report,
probably because it is simply not true. The report itself actually admits
that the Pentagon has no way to ascertain the facts of these cases. We do,
and we have proven that commanders are asking, pursuing and harassing
servicemembers out of the closet.
The increase in gay discharges to 997 represents a 67% increase in
discharges
under da,dt,dp; the percentage rises to 80% when the downsizing of the
force
is taken into account. This is the highest number of discharges since 1989
and the highest percentage since 1986.
Today's op-ed in the New York Times by Andrew Sullivan takes apart the
review
and the Pentagon's misleading and untruthful assertions. Its worth a look.
It can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/oped/09sul.html.
Your help is needed. Please contact Secretary of Defense Cohen, Vice-
President Gore, and President Clinton.
? Let them know that you are outraged by the offensive misinformation
leaked
to the press by the Pentagon.
? Tell Secretary of Defense Cohen that he should stick to the facts and fix
the problem rather than launch a smear campaign against gay people.
? Tell them the Pentagon should instead be focusing on the real problems of
anti-gay violence, harassment, witch hunts, and "asking" by commanders.
Those individuals serving our country should be praised instead of
slandered.
Secretary of Defense William Cohen, comment via DoD web page:
http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.html; voice: (703) 697-5737; fax:
(703) 695-1219; snail: 1000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
20301-1000
Vice-President Albert Gore, [email protected], voice: (202)
456-1111, White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20500
President William J. Clinton, email: [email protected]; voice:
(202)
456-1111; snail: White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20500
M. Benecke
Michelle M. Benecke
Co-Executive Director
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
PO Box 65301 ~ Washington DC 20035-5301
202.328.3244 ~ 202.797.1635 fax
[email protected] ~ www.sldn.org
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Thu,
9 Apr 1998 17:45:47 EDT
Received: from Storm.EOP.GOV by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:45:37 (EDT)
Received: from ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil ([138.145.175.3])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-10 #22921)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:45:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil with VINES-ISMTP; Thu,
09 Apr 1998 17:43:58 -0400 (EDT)
X-Incognito-SN: 410
From: [email protected], "Letitia A Gomez"@STORM.EOP.GOV
Errors-to: [email protected]
X-Incognito-Version: 4.11.23
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
END ATTACHMENT I
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:10-APR-1998 08:58:02.00
SUBJECT: fwd: DoD Report Update
TO: nadg ( nadg @ erols.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: lynnemc ( lynnemc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mra1019 ( mra1019 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SteveLew2 ( SteveLew2 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: ctroupe ( ctroupe @ services.state.mo.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kinseyvi ( kinseyvi @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: debaids ( debaids @ isdn.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: navdocsf ( navdocsf @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: helenmm ( helenmm @ itsa.ucsf.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: RAPANUIJER ( RAPANUIJER @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: scotthitt ( scotthitt @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BHattoy ( BHattoy @ ios.doi.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: fatema ( fatema @ womens-health.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bigbob411 (bigbob411 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nbollman ( nbollman @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: terje ( terje @ worldnet.att.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmdorian ( mmdorian @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rws82552 ( Rws82552 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jedelheit (jedelheit @ templeisrael.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bgw2 (bgw2 @ nipl.em.cdc.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: shenovice ( shenovice @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mojo 1025 ( mojo 1025 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: harndc ( harndc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rev_alta ( rev_alta @ juno.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: hornor ( hornor @ hsc.usc.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Isbell ( Isbell @ hugheshubbard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: thenders ( thenders @ glo.state.tx.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: NSG999 (NSG999 @ msn.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: katgerus ( katgerus @ sprynet.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jerryc (jerryc @ wizard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: raragon ( raragon @ sfaf.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: snabel ( snabel @ mem.po.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
fyi -
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 04/10/98
08:57 AM
LAGomez @ efaches.navfac.navy.mil
04/09/98 05:43:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya
cc:
Subject: fwd: DoD Report Update
FYI
Original Text
From: "SLDNI" <[email protected]>, on 4/9/98 4:40 PM:
To:
April 9, 1998
Greetings. Thank you if you have already responded to our last action
alert
by contacting the Secretary of Defense, Vice President and President. If
you
have not had the opportunity to do so, please weigh in now. Its important.
Message points and contact info are below. Now, here's the latest on the
Pentagon review.
The Pentagon has officially released its review of Don't Ask, Don't Tell,
Don't Pursue. If we were grading the report, we would give the
recommendations a "B." They address many, though not all, of our concerns.
In particular, the Pentagon will instruct commanders that anti-gay
harassment
will not be tolerated and they will reissue the Dorn memo we obtained last
year telling commanders to investigate reported harassment, not those who
are
victimized by it. Commanders will be instructed to seek guidance from
higher
headquarters before beginning investigations and they will be evaluated
during
their yearly command climate assessments on whether they are training their
units on da,dt,dp. These are good first steps.
However, we would give the Pentagon an "F" for the false and misleading
rhetoric they have employed in the press, where they have asserted with no
basis whatsoever that the significant increase in gay discharges last year
up to 997 from 850 the year before -- is due to people who come out in
order
to avoid their service obligation. This is not contained in the report,
probably because it is simply not true. The report itself actually admits
that the Pentagon has no way to ascertain the facts of these cases. We do,
and we have proven that commanders are asking, pursuing and harassing
servicemembers out of the closet.
The increase in gay discharges to 997 represents a 67% increase in
discharges
under da,dt,dp; the percentage rises to 80% when the downsizing of the
force
is taken into account. This is the highest number of discharges since 1989
and the highest percentage since 1986.
Today's op-ed in the New York Times by Andrew Sullivan takes apart the
review
and the Pentagon's misleading and untruthful assertions. Its worth a look.
It can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/oped/09sull.html.
Your help is needed. Please contact Secretary of Defense Cohen, Vice-
President Gore, and President Clinton.
? Let them know that you are outraged by the offensive misinformation
leaked
to the press by the Pentagon.
? Tell Secretary of Defense Cohen that he should stick to the facts and fix
the problem rather than launch a smear campaign against gay people.
? Tell them the Pentagon should instead be focusing on the real problems of
anti-gay violence, harassment, witch hunts, and "asking" by commanders.
Those individuals serving our country should be praised instead of
slandered.
Secretary of Defense William Cohen, comment via DoD web page:
http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.html; voice: (703) 697-5737; fax:
(703) 695-1219; snail: 1000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
20301-1000
Vice-President Albert Gore, [email protected], voice: (202)
456-1111, White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20500
President William J. Clinton, email: [email protected]; voice:
(202)
456-1111; snail: White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20500
M. Benecke
Michelle M. Benecke
Co-Executive Director
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
PO Box 65301 ~ Washington DC 20035-5301
202.328.3244 ~ 202.797.1635 fax
[email protected] ~ www.sldn.org
ATTACHMENT
1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Thu,
9 Apr 1998 17:45:47 EDT
Received: from Storm.EOP.GOV by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:45:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil ([138.145.175.3])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-10 #22921)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:45:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil with VINES-ISMTP; Thu,
09 Apr 1998 17:43:58 -0400 (EDT)
X-Incognito-SN: 410
From: [email protected], "Letitia A Gomez"@STORM.EOP.GOV
Errors-to: [email protected]
X-Incognito-Version: 4.11.23
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
END ATTACHMENT
1
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD )
CREATION DATE/TIME:10-APR-1998 08:57:42.00
SUBJECT: gays in the military
TO: nadg ( nadg @ erols.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: lynnemc ( lynnemc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mra 1019 ( mra1019 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SteveLew2 ( SteveLew2 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: ctroupe ( ctroupe @ services.state.mo.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kinseyvi ( kinseyvi @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: debaids ( debaids @ isdn.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ))
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: navdocsf ( navdocsf @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: helenmm ( helenmm @ itsa.ucsf.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: RAPANUIJER ( RAPANUIJER @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: scotthitt ( scotthitt @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BHattoy ( BHattoy @ ios.doi.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: fatema ( fatema @ womens-health.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bigbob411 ( bigbob411 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nbollman ( nbollman @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: terje ( terje @ worldnet.att.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmdorian ( mmdorian @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rws82552 ( Rws82552 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jedelheit (jedelheit @ templeisrael.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bgw2 (bgw2 @ nip1.em.cdc.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: shenovice ( shenovice @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mojo1025 ( mojo 1025 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: harndc ( harndc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rev_alta (rev_alta @ juno.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: hornor ( hornor @ hsc.usc.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Isbell ( Isbell @ hugheshubbard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: thenders ( thenders @ glo.state.tx.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: NSG999 (NSG999 @ msn.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: katgerus ( katgerus @ sprynet.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jerryc (jerryc @ wizard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: raragon ( raragon @ sfaf.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: snabel ( snabel @ mem.po.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
April 9, 1998
Undone by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
By ANDREW SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON "I think it's working," said Defense Secretary William
Cohen, referring to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay
members of the armed services. He said this while announcing that
discharges of homosexuals have increased by 67 percent since 1994. When
you factor in the military's downsizing, the real figure is closer to 80
percent. If this is Mr. Cohen's definition of success, one wonders what
failure would look like.
The real picture is actually grimmer. Although "don't ask, don't tell"
forbids military commanders from pursuing investigations of suspected
homosexual conduct without compelling evidence, violations of the policy
not to ask, pursue or harass homosexuals have soared, according to the
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the only watchdog group tracking
discharge cases under this policy.
The organization has documented 563 violations by military authorities of
"don't ask, don't tell" in 1997, a jump from 443 violations in 1996.
Reported cases of physical and verbal harassment of gay service members
rose 38 percent from 1996 to 1997; cases in which military authorities
illegally "asked" troops if they were gay increased 39 percent.
Until August of last year, the military was still even using enlistment
forms that directly asked about a person's sexual orientation. In its
report, the Pentagon said the original form was preserved for four years
"as a cost savings measure."
Witch hunts have continued. In 1996, an airman convicted of forcible
sodomy at Hickam Air Force Base had a life sentence reduced to 20 months
in return for outing 17 other allegedly gay servicemen. All the accused
air force men were discharged; the rapist served less than a year.
Secretary Cohen's improbable defense is that the vast majority of
discharges were voluntary. The proof? None in the Pentagon report, except
for this: "The Services believe that most of the [cases involving a
disclosure of homosexuality] -- although not all of them -- involve
service members who voluntarily elected to disclose their sexual
orientation to their peers, supervisors or commanders."
That's what it comes down to: "the Services believe " The report
later concedes that "because extensive inquiries or investigations are not
conducted in most of these cases, the reasons for [the increase in
numbers] are not known and would be difficult to ascertain." Compare this
with the documentation of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
The Pentagon further claimed that 80 percent of discharges were
"statement" cases, implying that individuals were discharged after
spontaneously declaring their orientation to their superiors. But that is
misleading at best. All that a "statement" case means is that the grounds
for discharge arose from what a service member allegedly said, and not
what he or she did.
Such "statements" can include private confessions to therapists, friends,
peers or family members that were subsequently reported to military
authorities.
I asked Michelle Benecke, co-director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, how many of the 1,300 people her group has helped in the last
four years have truly voluntarily disclosed their orientation. "None that
I've come across," she said.
To its credit, the Pentagon does admit in its report that it has a
problem. While insisting that the policy is "generally being implemented
properly," the military concedes that it has not been vigilant enough in
policing anti-gay harassment. As it now stands, someone attacked for being
gay cannot report the abuse without risking discharge as a result.
The report also acknowledges that some women have been intimidated into
not reporting sexual harassment, because they are sometimes accused of
being lesbians if they reject male advances. More needs to be done to
inform commanders of the regulations, the report adds.
These admissions would be more encouraging if the record was not so
damning. Last year, despite the 563 reported violations of "don't ask,
don't tell," not a single military commander was disciplined for
misconduct.
It's now clear that the policy has not simply failed. It is far worse than
what went on before. Gay service members are now allowed into the
military, only to face a series of tripwires intended to flush them out.
They have become, in effect, the unintended bait of rogue military
commanders. Other, more decent officers (and there are many) simply do not
know the rules, since the Pentagon has done a poor job of telling them.
What to do about this? The Pentagon has embraced a mix of spin, denial and
confession. The President has other options. Last year, he denounced
employment discrimination against homosexuals. But as Commander in Chief,
Bill Clinton has now fired more homosexuals than any other employer in
America. Is it too much to ask that this President finally live up to his
own words? Or with this President, is that now utterly beside the point?
Andrew Sullivan, a senior editor at The New Republic, is the author of the
forthcoming "Love Undetectable."
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:10-APR-1998 08:56:52.00
SUBJECT: fwd: PENTAGON LEAKS MISINFORMATION
TO: paul_yandura ( paul_yandura @ hud.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeff.Trandahl ( Jeff.Trandahl @ clerk.house.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: msmolinski ( msmolinski @ osophs.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: palmer1 ( palmer @ us.ibm.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: HMolina451 (HMolina451 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: MARTINB (MARTINB @ dmbb.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: clord ( clord @ aidsaction.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Marklacy ( Marklacy @ flash.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kelly wilson kent (kelly_wilson_kent @ HUD.GOV @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kkavanaugh ( kkavanaugh @ nccbuscc.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dc ( dc @ nrharural.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: zguerra ( zguerra @ admissions.caltech.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: agarner72 ( agarner72 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rdupaix ( rdupaix @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bcrow ( Bcrow @ worldbank.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ktuerff ( Ktuerff @ 4env.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rsorian ( rsorian @ osaspe.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: texjmp ( texjmp @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: joneill (joneill @ hrsa.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmartin ( mmartin @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: markeyop ( markeyop @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey Levi ( Jeffrey_Levi @ compuserve.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dkinch ( dkinch @ hotmail.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pkawata ( pkawata @ nmac.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: gjones1 ( gjones 1 @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dharvey ( dharvey @ aidspolicycenter.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: sean.m.grimes ( sean.m.grimes @ bankamerica.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dan.eckhardt ( dan.eckhardt @ mci.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pddfcaa ( pddfcaa @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gonzaloa ( Gonzaloa @ poz.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
fyi
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 04/10/98
08:56 AM
LAGomez @ efaches.navfac.navy.mil
04/07/98 04:42:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya
cc:
Subject: fwd: PENTAGON LEAKS MISINFORMATION
FYI
Original Text
From: "SLDN1" <[email protected]>, on 4/7/98 1:56 PM:
To:
April 7, 1998
ACTION ALERT:
PENTAGON LEAKS MISINFORMATION
On Friday, unnamed Pentagon Officials leaked offensive and untrue
statements
about gay servicemembers under the guise of explaining why gay discharges
have
risen 67% since the implementation of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't
Pursue" policy. The number of discharges this year was 997, the highest
number since 1989. These officials implied that gay servicemembers are
using
the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue" policy in order to escape their
military obligations and that gay people simply cannot "hack it" in the
military.
This spin is contrary to the report itself. In the report, the Department
of
Defense acknowledges that implementation of the policy has indeed been
problematic. It recognizes that DoD does not know what is causing the
rise
in
discharges. SLDN knows that the problem is continuing anti-gay
harassment,
witch-hunts, and improper investigations and asking. Recommendations
contained in the report include reissuing guidance concerning anti-gay
threats
and violence and ensuring that those implementing the policy receive proper
training. These recommendations are good first steps, however their
existence
has been lost in the offensive leaks to the press.
Your help is needed. Please contact Secretary of Defense Cohen, Vice-
President Gore, and President Clinton.
? Let them know that you are outraged by the offensive misinformation
leaked
to the press by the Pentagon.
? Tell Secretary of Defense Cohen that he should stick to the facts and fix
the problem rather than launch a smear campaign against gay people.
? Tell them the Pentagon should instead be focusing on the real problems of
anti-gay violence, harassment, witch hunts, and "asking" by commanders.
Those individuals serving our country should be praised instead of
slandered.
Secretary of Defense William Cohen, comment via DoD web page:
http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.html; voice: (703) 697-5737; fax:
(703) 695-1219; snail: 1000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
20301-1000
Vice-President Albert Gore, [email protected], voice: (202)
456-1111, White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20500
President William J. Clinton, email: [email protected]; voice:
(202)
456-1111; snail: White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20500
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue,
7 Apr 1998 16:48:05 EDT
Received: from Storm.EOP.GOV by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #22921)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Tue, 07 Apr 1998 16:48:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil ([138.145.175.3])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-10 #22921)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Tue, 07 Apr 1998 16:47:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil with VINES-ISMTP; Tue,
07 Apr 1998 16:43:30 -0400 (EDT)
X-Incognito-SN: 410
From: [email protected], "Letitia A Gomez"@STORM.EOP.GOV
Errors-to: [email protected]
X-Incognito-Version: 4.11.23
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
END ATTACHMENT 1
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:10-APR-1998 08:55:59.00
SUBJECT: gays in the military
TO: paul_yandura ( paul_yandura @ hud.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeff.Trandahl ( Jeff.Trandahl @ clerk.house.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: msmolinski ( msmolinski @ osophs.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: palmerl ( palmer1 @ us.ibm.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: HMolina451 (HMolina451 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: MARTINB ( MARTINB @ dmbb.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: clord ( clord @ aidsaction.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Marklacy ( Marklacy @ flash.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kelly wilson kent (kelly_wilson_kent @ HUD.GOV @ inet [ UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kkavanaugh ( kkavanaugh @ nccbuscc.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dc ( dc @ nrharural.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: zguerra ( zguerra @ admissions.caltech.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: agarner72 ( agarner72 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rdupaix ( rdupaix @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bcrow ( Bcrow @ worldbank.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ktuerff ( Ktuerff @ 4env.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rsorian ( rsorian @ osaspe.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: texjmp ( texjmp @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: joneill (joneill @ hrsa.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmartin ( mmartin @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: markeyop ( markeyop @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeffrey_Levi ( Jeffrey_Levi @ compuserve.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dkinch ( dkinch @ hotmail.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pkawata ( pkawata @ nmac.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: gjones ( gjones 1 @ os.dhhs.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dharvey ( dharvey @ aidspolicycenter.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: sean.m.grimes ( sean.m.grimes @ bankamerica.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dan.eckhardt ( dan.eckhardt @ mci.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: pddfcaa ( pddfcaa @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gonzaloa ( Gonzaloa @ poz.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
April 9, 1998
Undone by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
By ANDREW SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON -- "I think it's working," said Defense Secretary William
Cohen, referring to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay
members of the armed services. He said this while announcing that
discharges of homosexuals have increased by 67 percent since 1994. When
you factor in the military's downsizing, the real figure is closer to 80
percent. If this is Mr. Cohen's definition of success, one wonders what
failure would look like.
The real picture is actually grimmer. Although "don't ask, don't tell"
forbids military commanders from pursuing investigations of suspected
homosexual conduct without compelling evidence, violations of the policy
not to ask, pursue or harass homosexuals have soared, according to the
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the only watchdog group tracking
discharge cases under this policy.
The organization has documented 563 violations by military authorities of
"don't ask, don't tell" in 1997, a jump from 443 violations in 1996.
Reported cases of physical and verbal harassment of gay service members
rose 38 percent from 1996 to 1997; cases in which military authorities
illegally "asked" troops if they were gay increased 39 percent.
Until August of last year, the military was still even using enlistment
forms that directly asked about a person's sexual orientation. In its
report, the Pentagon said the original form was preserved for four years
"as a cost savings measure."
Witch hunts have continued. In 1996, an airman convicted of forcible
sodomy at Hickam Air Force Base had a life sentence reduced to 20 months
in return for outing 17 other allegedly gay servicemen. All the accused
air force men were discharged; the rapist served less than a year.
Secretary Cohen's improbable defense is that the vast majority of
discharges were voluntary. The proof? None in the Pentagon report, except
for this: "The Services believe that most of the [cases involving a
disclosure of homosexuality] -- although not all of them -- involve
service members who voluntarily elected to disclose their sexual
orientation to their peers, supervisors or commanders."
That's what it comes down to: "the Services believe " The report
later concedes that "because extensive inquiries or investigations are not
conducted in most of these cases, the reasons for [the increase in
numbers] are not known and would be difficult to ascertain." Compare this
with the documentation of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
The Pentagon further claimed that 80 percent of discharges were
"statement" cases, implying that individuals were discharged after
spontaneously declaring their orientation to their superiors. But that is
misleading at best. All that a "statement" case means is that the grounds
for discharge arose from what a service member allegedly said, and not
what he or she did.
Such "statements" can include private confessions to therapists, friends,
peers or family members that were subsequently reported to military
authorities.
I asked Michelle Benecke, co-director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, how many of the 1,300 people her group has helped in the last
four years have truly voluntarily disclosed their orientation. "None that
I've come across," she said.
To its credit, the Pentagon does admit in its report that it has a
problem. While insisting that the policy is "generally being implemented
properly," the military concedes that it has not been vigilant enough in
policing anti-gay harassment. As it now stands, someone attacked for being
gay cannot report the abuse without risking discharge as a result.
The report also acknowledges that some women have been intimidated into
not reporting sexual harassment, because they are sometimes accused of
being lesbians if they reject male advances. More needs to be done to
inform commanders of the regulations, the report adds.
These admissions would be more encouraging if the record was not so
damning. Last year, despite the 563 reported violations of "don't ask,
don't tell," not a single military commander was disciplined for
misconduct.
It's now clear that the policy has not simply failed. It is far worse than
what went on before. Gay service members are now allowed into the
military, only to face a series of tripwires intended to flush them out.
They have become, in effect, the unintended bait of rogue military
commanders. Other, more decent officers (and there are many) simply do not
know the rules, since the Pentagon has done a poor job of telling them.
What to do about this? The Pentagon has embraced a mix of spin, denial and
confession. The President has other options. Last year, he denounced
employment discrimination against homosexuals. But as Commander in Chief,
Bill Clinton has now fired more homosexuals than any other employer in
America. Is it too much to ask that this President finally live up to his
own words? Or with this President, is that now utterly beside the point?
Andrew Sullivan, a senior editor at The New Republic, is the author of the
forthcoming ``Love Undetectable."
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
002. email
Daniel C. Montoya to Jeff Trandahl at 09:50:10.00. Subject: RE: gays
04/10/1998
b(6)
in the military. (1 page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Don't Ask, Don't Tell])
OA/Box Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/28/1998 - 06/25/1998]
2015-0017-F
ab1568
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information |(a)(1) of the PRAJ
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office |(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA|
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information |(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy |(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya (CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:13-APR-1998 11:38:44.00
SUBJECT: re: gays in the military
TO: Todd A. Summers (CN=Todd A. Summers/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Sarah T. Holewinski (CN=Sarah T. Holewinski/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
greg jones is a good guy. he is leg affairs and will be long term
(career). i see him all the time in my neighborhood.
aside from the meet and greet with you and sandy (she could do a drop-in
and leave, if you want), he wants to establish the important leg issues
for onap so he can keep them on his radar screen. he was in the meeting
with the council, sandy and the secretary back in september and i know
he's been in other meetings with her.
sarah - i just spoke to todd and he said a meeting is okay. can you set
it up for this week?
let todd and sandy know as well as myself so i can see him afterwards.
thanks,
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 04/13/98
11:19 AM
gjones1 @ os.dhhs.gov
04/13/98 10:11:12 AM
Please respond to [email protected]
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP
cc:
Subject: re: gays in the military
Daniel -
Since Sean Donohue has moved to the HHS Executive Secretariat, I have been
informed that I will be covering HIV/AIDS legislative issues for our
office. I will fill in as necessary until a replacement is found for the
issues I currently am assigned, but anticipate the permanent change within
4-6 weeks.
Please continue to forward info to me. I'd also welcome the opportunity to
meet with you (and folks from Sandy Thurman's office) over at OEOB sometime
in the near future to get input on the status of legislation and what
issues you all see as heating up before close of Congress later this fall.
Let me know if such a meeting would be useful (from your perspective) and
if so, when it might be scheduled.
Thanks. I'm looking forward to working you and the others.
Greg Jones < [email protected] >
(202) 690-6047 / fax: (202) 690-8425
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Legislation
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Original Text
From: <[email protected]>, on 4/10/98 8:55 AM:
April 9, 1998
Undone by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
By ANDREW SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON -- "I think it's working," said Defense Secretary William Cohen,
referring to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay members
of the armed services. He said this while announcing that discharges of
homosexuals have increased by 67 percent since 1994. When you factor in the
military's downsizing, the real figure is closer to 80 percent. If this is
Mr. Cohen's definition of success, one wonders what failure would look
like.
The real picture is actually grimmer. Although "don't ask, don't tell"
forbids military commanders from pursuing investigations of suspected
homosexual conduct without compelling evidence, violations of the policy
not to ask, pursue or harass homosexuals have soared, according to the
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the only watchdog group tracking
discharge cases under this policy.
The organization has documented 563 violations by military authorities of
"don't ask, don't tell" in 1997, a jump from 443 violations in 1996.
Reported cases of physical and verbal harassment of gay service members
rose 38 percent from 1996 to 1997; cases in which military authorities
illegally "asked" troops if they were gay increased 39 percent.
Until August of last year, the military was still even using enlistment
forms that directly asked about a person's sexual orientation. In its
report, the Pentagon said the original form was preserved for four years
"as a cost savings measure."
Witch hunts have continued. In 1996, an airman convicted of forcible sodomy
at Hickam Air Force Base had a life sentence reduced to 20 months in return
for outing 17 other allegedly gay servicemen. All the accused air force men
were discharged; the rapist served less than a year.
Secretary Cohen's improbable defense is that the vast majority of
discharges were voluntary. The proof? None in the Pentagon report, except
for this: "The Services believe that most of the [cases involving a
disclosure of homosexuality] -- although not all of them -- involve service
members who voluntarily elected to disclose their sexual orientation to
their peers, supervisors or commanders."
That's what it comes down to: "the Services believe
" The report
later concedes that "because extensive inquiries or investigations are not
conducted in most of these cases, the reasons for [the increase in numbers]
are not known and would be difficult to ascertain." Compare this with the
documentation of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
The Pentagon further claimed that 80 percent of discharges were "statement"
cases, implying that individuals were discharged after spontaneously
declaring their orientation to their superiors. But that is misleading at
best. All that a "statement" case means is that the grounds for discharge
arose from what a service member allegedly said, and not what he or she
did.
Such "statements" can include private confessions to therapists, friends,
peers or family members that were subsequently reported to military
authorities.
I asked Michelle Benecke, co-director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, how many of the 1,300 people her group has helped in the last four
years have truly voluntarily disclosed their orientation. "None that I've
come across," she said.
To its credit, the Pentagon does admit in its report that it has a problem.
While insisting that the policy is "generally being implemented properly,"
the military concedes that it has not been vigilant enough in policing
anti-gay harassment. As it now stands, someone attacked for being gay
cannot report the abuse without risking discharge as a result.
The report also acknowledges that some women have been intimidated into not
reporting sexual harassment, because they are sometimes accused of being
lesbians if they reject male advances. More needs to be done to inform
commanders of the regulations, the report adds.
These admissions would be more encouraging if the record was not so
damning. Last year, despite the 563 reported violations of "don't ask,
don't tell," not a single military commander was disciplined for
misconduct.
It's now clear that the policy has not simply failed. It is far worse than
what went on before. Gay service members are now allowed into the military,
only to face a series of tripwires intended to flush them out. They have
become, in effect, the unintended bait of rogue military commanders. Other,
more decent officers (and there are many) simply do not know the rules,
since the Pentagon has done a poor job of telling them.
What to do about this? The Pentagon has embraced a mix of spin, denial and
confession. The President has other options. Last year, he denounced
employment discrimination against homosexuals. But as Commander in Chief,
Bill Clinton has now fired more homosexuals than any other employer in
America. Is it too much to ask that this President finally live up to his
own words? Or with this President, is that now utterly beside the point?
Andrew Sullivan, a senior editor at The New Republic, is the author of the
forthcoming ``Love Undetectable."
r
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: RUBIN_E@A1@CD@LNGTWY (RUBIN_E@A1@CD@LNGTWY (NSC)
CREATION DATE/TIME:17-APR-1998 17:11:51.00
SUBJECT: April 8 NSC News Summary
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
UNKNOWN]
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling@eop ( Gene B. Sperling@eop [ OPD])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
NATIONAL SECURITY NEWS SUMMARY
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1998
EUROPE/NIS/CANADA
N. IRELAND: Blair flies to Belfast to join peace talks as fatal deadlock
threatens process. Masked gunmen kill man identified as a loyalist
paramilitary member. Mitchell is the "man to trust" for all sides at
talks. (NYT1,3;WP17,24;LAT3;USA1,10;WT11)
FRANCE: Chirac's conservative coalition splits over control of Paris city
government. (WP18)
RUSSIA: Yeltsin pushes for Duma approval of Kiriyenko as prime minister.
(WP19,NYT3,LAT2,USA11)
GERMANY: Tale of one of Germany's secret spymasters is subject of a new
documentary. Kohl faces uphill battle for re-election. Construction
reveals bunkers of Goebbels, others under Berlin. (WP20,NYT6,WT11)
GREECE: Critical comments by Amb. Burns set off debate in Greek
parliament.
(NYT8,USA11,WT11)
NATO: Polls show U.S. public is "acutely uninterested" in outcome of
enlargement ratification vote. (LAT2)
CZECH REP.: Ancient beer-maker goes head-to-head with Anheuser-Busch over
Budweiser name. (LAT1)
FRY: Kosovo insurgents are buying weapons in Albania's lawless highlands,
seek "blood revenge." Kosovar leaders reject Belgrade offer of talks.
(WT1,18)
E.U.: Led by Blair, European socialist parties agree on strategy to reach
out to Third World, other nations. (WT11)
ASIA/PACIFIC
INDONESIA: IMF, Jakarta agree on new bailout package allowing resumption
of
loans. (NYTI,WP18,USA/B1,WSJ19)
CHINA: Chinese and Hong Kong governments are exempted from privacy and
anti-discrimination laws. Beijing deports Chinese-American scholar and
human rights activist. As prosperity increases, Chinese tourists are now
a
common sight in other Asian countries. (WP18;NYT1,7;WT12)
BURMA: SLORC bars visit by Richardson, retaliating for U.S. ban on
officials' visits. (NYT8,WT12)
JAPAN: Probe of central bank corruption uncovers improprieties. New U.S.
Ambassador Foley wins plaudits in Tokyo. Merrill Lynch sets its sights on
dominating Japan's securities market. Citicorp is thriving as haven for
jittery Japanese. Japanese fret that they are being left behind as market
changes. (WP18;NYT10;WSJ1,17,18)
PHILIPPINES: Manila wants U.S. to return bells seized in 1901; Ramos visit
is possible venue. Four-page ad supplement in Washington Times.
(WP21;WT1,suppl.)
MIDDLE EAST/SOUTH ASIA
IRAN: Uproar over jailing of Tehran mayor reveals splits within ruling
regime. Iran releases 5600 Iraqi POWs. (NYT6,USA11,WT11)
MEPP: Israel on alert after soldiers kill Palestinian driver who allegedly
ran a roadblock. Ross will travel to Mideast after Passover; Netanyahu
sending envoy here. (WP18,NYT7,USA11,WT12)
SAUDI ARABIA: Muslims complete final rites of hajj in Mecca. (WP18,LAT2)
EGYPT: Cairo denies persecuting Coptic Christians, opposes Wolf-Specter
bill. (WT12)
SOUTH ASIA: India blames China for selling Pakistan long-range missiles,
says it has them too. (WP18,WT12)
LATIN AMERICA/CARIBBEAN
TRADE: Sen. McCain praises Clinton for working toward hemispheric free
trade, laments failure of fast-track legislation. (WT4)
BRAZIL: Slash and burn agriculture threatens Amazon and the livelihood of
its inhabitants. (WP1)
PARAGUAY: Alleging lack of consular notification, Asuncion seeks to block
Virginia execution. (WP18)
CUBA: Twelve former political prisoners arrive in Canada; some may go on
to
Miami. State, Treasury dispute claim by trade show organizer that it has
permission to organize a show in Cuba. (WP18,USA11)
PANAMA: El Nino is hurting the canal: low water levels and drought bring
restrictions on passage. (WP20)
EL SALVADOR: Relatives of U.S. nuns slain in 1980 are outraged to learn
that officers linked to killing received U.S. residence. (USA10)
MEXICO: Government is nursing its ailing banking system. (WSJ19)
AFRICA
NIGERIA: Protests by poor tribal communities rise against oil development
on coast. (WP17)
RWANDA: Memorial to Tutsi victims of 1994 genocide is dedicated in Kigali.
(WP18)
GLOBAL/DEFENSE/ECON
TWA 800: NTSB urges rewiring of 747 fuel sensors to prevent another
explosion. (NYT1,WP2,LAT1,USA1)
DEFENSE: Secretary Cohen issues revisions to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
policy
on homosexuality. Project on Government Oversight says U.S. military is
overloaded with flag-rank officers. Cohen strongly backs Navy's decision
to discharge a gay sailor. (LATI,USA11,WTI)
ENVIRONMENT: One-eight of all plant species are threatened with
extinction.
(WP1)
U.N./CONGRESS: Rep. Solomon apologizes for saying SecGen Annan should be
horsewhipped. (WP5,USA11)
CTBT: Administration urges Senate to ratify treaty. (NYT7)
INTEL: Ex-wife of CIA spy suspect says the FBI ignored her warnings that
he
needed help. (LATI)
IMMIGRATION: 55,000 applications selected at random for immigration visa
lottery. (USA11)
ADMINISTRATION
KAMEN: Nick Burns is assailed by Greek parliament speaker for acting like
a
Roman governor; foreign minister defends his comments. Anne Luzzatto is
off to the private sector at the end of the month. Adm. Pease is retiring
to work for General Dynamics. Ginny Terzano has also gone private. (WP21)
OPINION
WP: Editorial says the U.S. should put up with U.N. human rights
inspections and criticism of our own performance because it gives us a
useful mechanism for addressing abuses by other countries. Editorial
urges
new legislation to correct problems with asylum procedure reforms in the
1996 immigration law. (22)
NYT: Editorial expresses concern that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has
led to a 67 percent increase in the number of service members forced out
for homosexuality. Editorial says the U.S. needs to encourage Saudi
Arabia to modernize and become more democratic as King Fahd fades from the
scene. Buergenthal op-ed urges the U.S. to come clean about what it knows
about Central America's "dirty wars" of the 1980s. Jessica Stern urges
that we act now to prepare for bioterrorism incidents. (24-25)
LAT: Mann questions how important the Clinton-Yeltsin relationship is when
events are rapidly moving beyond them. Herschensohn says that the ABM
treaty (totally omitting minor considerations like technical feasibility)
is the only stumbling block to fulfillment of Reagan?s vision of an
anti-missile defense. Toffler and Toffler review the implications of a
selective immigration policy that discourages unskilled laborers from
entering the U.S. (5, 11)
WSJ: Editorial calls on Hashimoto to deliver supply-side tax reform, not
tax-cut tokenism. (22)
USA: Editorial says the Administration was wrong to politicize the base
closure process through its privatization efforts in California and Texas,
but that should not be an excuse for Congress to maintain a larger than
necessary defense infrastructure. Weldon's Opposing View calls on the
President to reverse the privatization attempt, then somehow links the
whole issue to too many deployments and a lack of allied burden-sharing.
Shapiro column says INS urgently needs reform but only new leadership can
make it happen. (11,14)
WT: Editorial supports Cohen?s call for additional base closures, while
slamming the President for making the hard sell to Congress even tougher.
Bartlett supports Armey?s opposition to further IMF funding, but
recognizes
it will pass and encourages Treasury to increase IMF oversight. Hackett
calls for passage of full theater missile defense to counteract Iranian
efforts to obtain Russian missile technology. (14-17)
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Todd A. Summers (CN=Todd A. Summers/OU=OPD/O=EOP [OPD])
CREATION DATE/TIME:28-APR-1998 20:15:28.00
SUBJECT: text for advocate piece
TO: Scotthitt ( Scotthitt @ aol.com @ inet UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Last week, the President allowed bad politics to override good science in
our battle against AIDS. While his Secretary of Health and Human Services
declared, finally, that science had proven that needle exchange programs
reduce HIV infections without encouraging drug use, the President said
federal funds could not be used for them. It was the kind of
&split-the-baby 8 mentality that has haunted this Administration since
its first days (remember &Don ,t Ask, Don ,t Tell 8?).
One of the most difficult things to do in political life is to publicly
challenge the decisions of political friends who stray into unacceptable
territory. And make no mistake, this President has been our friend on
AIDS. Funding levels for AIDS programs and research have increased
dramatically, even when overall discretionary funding has remained
stagnant. Drug approvals come faster, research is better coordinated,
services are expanding. All of this deserves our praise.
Unfortunately, good is not good enough in the fight against AIDS. Until a
cure and a vaccine are found, HIV must be treated as the health crisis
that it is.
President Clinton articulated back in 1995 the goal of &[reducing] the
number of new [HIV] infections each and every year until there are no new
infections. 8 With as many as 20,000 new infections occurring in this
country directly or indirectly from injection drug use, his decision to
withold federal funds for needle exchange will make it impossible to
achieve his stated goal.
This is not the only time that the President has stumbled in this fight.
Despite success in funding for research and treatment, the Clinton
administration *like its predecessors *has failed to lay out a coherent,
strategic HIV prevention plan of action. Funding for HIV prevention and
drug treatment remain woefully inadequate, particularly when compared with
the monumental toll in human lives, medical expenses, and lost
productivity stemming from HIV and AIDS.
All of this when experts warn that an estimated 40,000 Americans will
become infected with HIV this year alone *40% will be infected from a
dirty needle and another 10-20% will be infected because they have had sex
with an infected IV drug user. Without an honest, scientifically-based
HIV prevention strategy that includes needle exchange and drug treatment
programs, the President ,S promise rings hollow.
Last year, Congress debated whether to ban funding for needle exchange
programs and decided to punt the political hot potato back to the
Administration. They voted to allow local communities the option to use
part of their prevention dollars for these programs if the Secretary of
HHS declared that scientific studies showed that they decreased HIV
transmissions without encouraging drug use.
Yes, this is a political hot potato. Yes, this issue requires political
courage. But most importantly, it requires leadership to educate the
American people about the science and the lives that will be saved.
Fifteen years ago, we saw real courage from Dr. C. Everett Koop who
refused to be politically intimidated and insisted that this nation follow
the science. He educated millions and helped a frightened nation begin to
come to terms with this disease.
Dr. Koop set the standard both for political courage and for following the
science. The Administration should have done the same, allowing local
communities the choice as to how best use their prevention
dollars *including the exchange of clean needles to injection drug users.
But instead, the President stepped in and, ignoring the unanimous advice
from AIDS czar Thurman, Secretary Shalala, National Institutes of Health
Director Varmus and Surgeon General Satcher, said no federal dollars could
be used by local communities to implement these life-saving programs.
And to whom did the President listen? Barry McCaffrey, the drug czar with
no public health or medical experience. All McCaffrey could say was, &it
sends the wrong message. 8 Hardly a rousing statement for ending this
epidemic.
Granted the approval of any needle exchange policy would face an uphill
battle in Congress, with Republicans eager to demagogue on the vital
public health issue. But the chance of losing should not have deterred
the Administration from following the science. That ,S leadership.
It is at exactly such moments that we need the President to rise above
political rhetoric, follow the science, and communicate that science
directly to the nation. Thus far, the President has failed this test.
Sadly, the epidemic will rage on, fueled as much by political expedience
as it is by HIV.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME:18-MAY-1998 13:22:59.00
SUBJECT: fwd: SLDN's Response to DoD Review
TO: Judtaral ( Judtaral @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nadg ( nadg @ erols.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: lynnemc ( lynnemc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: 1019 (mra1019 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SteveLew2 ( SteveLew2 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: ctroupe ( ctroupe @ services.state.mo.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kinseyvi (kinseyvi @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: debaids ( debaids @ isdn.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: navdocsf ( navdocsf @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: helenmm ( helenmm @ itsa.ucsf.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: RAPANUIJER ( RAPANUIJER @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: scotthitt ( scotthitt @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BHattoy ( BHattoy @ ios.doi.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: fatema ( fatema @ womens-health.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bigbob411 (bigbob411 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nbollman ( nbollman @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: terje ( terje @ worldnet.att.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dbone ( dbone @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mmdorian ( mmdorian @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rwstaff ( rwstaff @ uswest.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jedelheit (jedelheit @ templeisrael.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bgw2 (bgw2 @ nipl.em.cdc.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: shenovice ( shenovice @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mojo 1025 ( mojo1025 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: harndc ( harndc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rev_alta ( rev_alta @ juno.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: hornor ( hornor @ hsc.usc.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Isbell ( Isbell @ hugheshubbard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: thenders ( thenders @ glo.state.tx.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: NSG999 ( NSG999 @ msn.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: katgerus ( katgerus @ sprynet.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jerryc (jerryc @ wizard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: raragon ( raragon @ sfaf.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: snabel ( snabel @ mem.po.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
fyi -
dcm
Forwarded by Daniel C. Montoya/OPD/EOP on 05/18/98
01:22 PM
LAGomez @ efaches.navfac.navy.mil
05/15/98 05:13:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Daniel C. Montoya
cc:
Subject: fwd: SLDN's Response to DoD Review
fyi
Original Text
From: "SLDNI" <[email protected]>, on 5/15/98 4:31 PM:
To:
May 15, 1998
ACTION ALERT.
Please write, call, fax, or e-mail Secretary Cohen, President
Clinton
and
Vice President Gore with the following critical message:
The DoD report on the implementation of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell,
Don't
Pursue"
is not and cannot be credible until DoD lets commanders know what the rules
are. Reports show that many commanders do not know that the current policy
contains limits on investigations and was intended to protect people's
privacy. The result: gay discharges soared to 997 last year, their
highest
level since 1988. DoD needs to act and to act now.
Attached you will find SLDN's letter to Secretary Cohen regarding
DoD's
report on the implementation of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue."
Also,
attached is a one page list of talking points.
We are coordinating this action with the members of the Human
Rights
Campaign
and the National Lesbian & Gay Task Force. As always, thank you for your
assistance.
Secretary of Defense William Cohen, comment via DoD web page:
http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.html; voice: (703) 697-5737; fax:
(703) 695-1219; snail: 1000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
20301-1000
President William J. Clinton, email: [email protected]; voice:
(202)
456-1111; snail: White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20500
Vice-President Albert Gore, [email protected], White House, 1600
Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20500
TALKING POINTS
DOD REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
"DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL, DON'T PURSUE"
+ Gay Discharges Are Up 67%. Discharges soared to 997 in 1997, a 67%
increase
under the policy, and the highest level of discharges since 1988.
+ DoD Misrepresents Report Findings. The DoD report admits that the
reasons
for increased discharges "are not known." Yet, officials publicly
represented
that increased discharges are due to gays "opting out" of the military.
This
unsupported and offensive generalization raises questions about DoD's
credibility and commitment to fair enforcement of the policy.
+ Commands Continue To Ask, Pursue and Harass. SLDN documented 1379
instances
in four years where commanders did not follow the rules under this policy.
DoD's report is non-responsive to these documented command violations.
+ DoD Fails To Address Limits To Investigations and Intent of Policy To
Protect People's Privacy. A major problem is that personnel do not know
the
rules. DoD cannot be deemed credible until it issues guidance on the
limits
to investigations and the intent of the policy.
+ DoD Ignores Coercive Tactics. The DoD report fails to respond to
documented
instances where commanders threatened service members with prison unless
they
confessed to being gay or accused others as gay, as occurred on the USS
Simon
Lake. The report also ignored the practice of seizing personal diaries to
find out if someone is gay, as in the case of West Point Cadet Nicole
Galvan,
and the practice of questioning parents and siblings per Air Force
instructions. Secretary Cohen should end these practices.
+ DoD Fails To Address Issues of Accountability and Recourse. The report
omits
the issues of accountability for command violations and recourse for
personnel
harmed by improper inquiries.
+ DoD Did Not Interview Service Members Affected by The Policy. The
Department failed to contact one of the primary sources of information on
this
subject for its review.
+ DoD Agrees That Health Care Providers Are Not Required To Turn In Gay
People. Providers should be informed of this important clarification, a
step
the DoD report fails to recommend. Secretary Cohen should further clarify
that information confided in a health care provider should not be used for
purposes of discharge.
+ Some Recommendations are Problematic. Recommendations concerning
training
evaluations, the use of lawyers to police command actions and service
Secretary approval for some investigations raise many questions and contain
loopholes that could do more harm than good.
+ DoD Should Implement its Good Recommendations Now. The Department should
implement (1) guidance against anti-gay harassment, and (2) an end to
pretrial
agreements to solicit names of suspected gay service members, as
recommended
in the DoD report.
ATTACHMENT
1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT:[ATTACH.D35]MAIL478975730.126 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
END ATTACHMENT
1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #29131)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Fri,
15 May 1998 17:16:09 EDT
Received: from Storm.EOP.GOV by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #29131)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Fri, 15 May 1998 17:16:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil ([138.145.175.3])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-10#22921)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Fri, 15 May 1998 17:15:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by ches02.efaches.navfac.navy.mil with VINES-ISMTP; Fri,
15 May 1998 17:14:33 -0400 (EDT)
X-Incognito-SN: 410
From: [email protected], "Letitia A Gomez"@STORM.EOP.GOV
Errors-to: [email protected]
X-Incognito-Version: 4.11.23
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
END ATTACHMENT 2
May 25, 1998
Dear Secretary Cohen:
The number of discharges under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue" climbed last year to its
highest level since 1988. Most members of Congress, like us, believed that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell,
Don't Pursue" would result in a decline in discharges, not an increase.
We are concerned by the report that the Department of Defense misrepresented to the public
the findings of its year-long review of the policy. The public representation was that gay discharges are
increasing because more gays are "coming out," though the report clearly states that the reasons for the
increasing discharge numbers "are not known."
Reports the past four years have suggested that one of the reasons gay discharges have climbed
is that military personnel are not following the rules and guidelines agreed to by Congress. We
understand that Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has made a very reasonable suggestion to
correct this problem. The recommendation is for the Department to issue guidance on the limits to gay
investigations and the intent of the policy to respect people's privacy using exact quotes from the
existing regulations. This is a sensible recommendation that deserves your fullest consideration.
Sincerely,
SENATE
Sen. Jeff Bingaman
Sen. Barbara Boxer
Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Sen. John Chafee
Sen. Max Cleland
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato
Sen. Christopher Dodd
Sen Richard Durbin
Sen. Russell Feingold
Sen. Dianne Feinstein
Sen. Slade Gorton
Sen. Tom Harkin
Sen. Daniel Inouye
Sen. Ted Kennedy
Sen. Bob Kerrey
Sen. John Kerry
Sen. Herb Kohl
Sen. Mary Landrieu
Sen. Patrick Leahy
Sen. Carl Levin
Sen. Joseph Lieberman
Sen. McCain
Sen. Barbara Mikulski
Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun
Sen. Patty Murray
Sen. Jack Reed
Sen. Charles Robb
Sen. Paul Sarbanes
Sen. Olympia Snowe
Sen. Arlen Specter
Sen. Robert Toricelli
Sen. Paul Wellstone
Sen. Ron Wyden
HOUSE
Rep. Neil Abercrombie
Rep. Gary Ackerman
Rep. Bentsen
Rep. Howard Berman
Rep. George Brown
Rep. Sherrod Brown
Rep. Tom Campbell
Rep. John Conyers
Rep. Peter DeFazio
Rep. Diana DeGette
Rep. William Delahunt
Rep. Rosa DeLauro
Rep. Eliot Engel
Rep. Anna Eshoo
Rep. Lane Evans
Rep. Vic Fazio
Rep. Bob Filner
Rep. Thomas Foglietta
Rep. Mark Foley
Rep. Tillie Fowler
Rep. Barney Frank
Rep. Elizabeth Furse
Rep. Dick Gephardt
Rep. Jane Harman
Rep. Hinchey
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton
Rep. Joseph Kennedy
Rep. Patrick Kennedy
Rep, Jim Kolbe
Rep. Tom Lantos
Rep. John Lewis
Rep. Nita Lowey
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy
Rep. Jim McDermott
Rep. Cynthia McKinney
Rep. Marty Meehan
Rep. Carrie Meek
Rep. Patsy Mink
Rep. Constance Morella
Rep. Patrick Moyniham
Rep. Nadler
Rep. John Olver
Rep. Nancy Pelosi
Rep. Charles Rangel
Rep. Jack Reed (Westpoint grad)
Rep. Lynn Rivers
Rep. Lucille Roybal - Allard
Rep. Bobby Rush
Rep. Loretta Sanchez
Rep. Martin Sabo
Rep. Jose Serano
Rep. Christopher Shays
Rep. David Skaggs
Rep. Louise Slaughter
Rep. Pete Stark
Rep. Ellen Tauscher
Rep. John Tierney
Rep. Edolphus Towns
Rep. Maxine Waters
Rep. Henry Waxman
Rep. Lynn Woolsey
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Daniel C. Montoya ( CN=Daniel C. Montoya/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD )
CREATION DATE/TIME:25-JUN-1998 09:48:55.00
SUBJECT: new article
TO: Judtaral ( Judtaral @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nadg (nadg @ erols.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: lynnemc ( lynnemc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mra 1019 ( mra1019 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: SteveLew2 ( SteveLew2 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: ctroupe ( ctroupe @ services.state.mo.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: kinseyvi ( kinseyvi @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: debaids ( debaids @ isdn.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: navdocsf ( navdocsf @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: helenmm ( helenmm @ itsa.ucsf.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: RAPANUIJER ( RAPANUIJER @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: scotthitt ( scotthitt @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: BHattoy ( BHattoy @ ios.doi.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: fatema ( fatema @ womens-health.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bigbob411 (bigbob411 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: nbollman ( nbollman @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: terje ( terje @ worldnet.att.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: dbone ( dbone @ irvine.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: miami2000 ( miami2000 @ earthlink.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rwstaff ( rwstaff @ uswest.net @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jedelheit (jedelheit @ templeisrael.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: bgw2 (bgw2 @ nipl.em.cdc.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: shenovice ( shenovice @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: mojo1025 ( mojo1025 @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: harndc ( harndc @ aol.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: rev_alta ( rev alta @ juno.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: hornor ( hornor @ hsc.usc.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Isbell ( Isbell @ hugheshubbard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: thenders ( thenders @ glo.state.tx.us @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: ngutierrez ( ngutierrez @ hcfa.gov @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: katgerus ( katgerus @ sprynet.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: jerryc (jerryc @ wizard.com @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: raragon (raragon @ sfaf.org @ inet [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: snabel ( snabel @ mem.po.com @ inet UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
*
Reprint rights for this copyrighted news article must be obtained
*
*
by you from the originating news organization.
*
NY Daily News 6/24/98
You can e-mail the Daily News editors at [email protected]
Gay-Bashing Divides GOP and the Nation
By COKIE and STEVEN V. ROBERTS
Daily News Columnists
The strategy of some Republican leaders is now clear. They intend to make
gay- bashing a central part of their election campaign this fall.
This might energize conservative Christians, a key element of the GOP
base. But it has a destructive and divisive impact on our politics and
should be disowned by honorable party members. Besides, the strategy could
backfire, alienating mainstream voters who believe in fundamental
fairness. And it should.
Republicans are facing off-year elections, when turnout is traditionally
low. That puts a premium on firing up hard-core supporters, and the best
way to get them excited is to exploit their fear and anger. But that's
hard to do when a booming economy has most voters feeling secure and
satisfied.
Morever, the GOP's golden oldies don't work so well anymore. Attacking
Democrats as wasteful spenders falls flat in the face of budget surpluses.
The embers of anti-communism, always ripe for a good stirring, have grown
cold.
That leaves the holy trinity of social issues dear to the religious right:
assailing abortion, promoting prayer and harassing homosexuals.
Look what's happened recently. In the Senate, a small band of
right-wingers is blocking the nomination of James Hormel as ambassador to
Luxembourg. Because Hormel is openly gay and a supporter of gay causes,
he's being trashed as an unfit representative of his country.
A few Republicans have been courageous enough to stand up to this hate-
mongering. Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, who has a large gay constituency in New
York, wrote, "I am embarrassed that our Republican Party, the party of
Lincoln, is seen to be the force behind this injustice."
But Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott, the Republican leader, continues to
pander to the right and block a vote on Hormel. That's not surprising,
given the views on homosexuality Lott expressed on a TV talk show last
week. Noting that his own father was an alcoholic, Lott compared being gay
to sexual addiction or kleptomania.
This was clearly not an isolated outburst. At the Texas GOP convention
this month, the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay activists, were
barred from having an exhibit booth. Robert Black, the state party
spokesman, called them a "hate group" and compared them to the Ku Klux
Klan.
The religious right is a legitimate force in Republican circles and
deserves to be heard, but it threatens to stain the whole party with its
brand of self- righteous intolerance. And that has important implications
for the congressional elections this fall, and the presidential contest in
2000.
The right already has blackballed any potential national candidate * such
as Gov. Pataki or New Jersey Gov. Christie Whitman * who supports abortion
rights. Now they are trying to make gay-baiting a litmus test as well.
Gary Bauer, a leading voice on the religious right, is already questioning
whether Gov. George W. Bush of Texas is "conservative enough" to qualify
for the party's nomination. Bauer, who is toying with a candidacy of his
own, says Bush is not yet "adamant enough against same-sex marriages and
inclusion of homosexuals in the GOP."
The Democrats are not immune from the impulse to pander on gay issues.
Bill Clinton got into trouble by pushing for gays in the military. Vice
President Gore crassly courted homosexual support by praising the lesbian
character in the TV sitcom "Ellen."
But what these Republicans are doing is much worse. Their cynical decision
to demonize gays is meanspirited and un-American. They deserve to be
repudiated.