Remarks by Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge To the National Press Club
Date: November 05, 2003Source: Computer Crime Research Center
... and take advantage of the talent and experience and resources we have.
NextThe integration of the IT piece, the information and technology piece, is a monstrous task. It's a huge task. But again, they are systems. There are a lot of smart people out there that are in the process of helping us integrate the system.
Frankly, it's been a high priority for the President. Frankly, one of the initiatives of this Administration is they operate through the Office of Management and Budget -- is we get a report card. There's a management report card that Mitch Daniels and OMB gives to every department and agency in the federal government. We start in the red. Now don't get alarmed, don't misinterpret that. We start because we're new. We start at the ground level. But we think we can build, we think, rather quickly to improve the management system, the technology system, the personnel system, because the Congress gave us the flexibility to do it.
MS. LYTLE: What did you learn from the SARS outbreak that could be applied to the possibility of a bio-terrorism attack?
SECRETARY RIDGE: Honesty, early detection and immediate response is the most important thing we can do. Take a look at how that information continues to seep out as to when the virus was first detected in China and when they first responded to it and when they basically painted the complete picture.
It's not just the SARS epidemic, but it was also the tough but valuable lessons around anthrax that I learned shortly after being sworn in as the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, is that you need to have a unified, complete, public message. And when it comes to responding to the presence of something like SARS, it has to be comprehensive. Frankly, if I can take that one step further, in the future if something happens like that -- I referred to it and eluded to it in my earlier comments -- that's where the world of journalists and the role of the press is critical.
Rumors can abound. Rumors can be divisive and destructive. And so it will be our job in the Department of Homeland Security and hopefully to -- working with HHS, because we are building a national bio-surveillance detection system. I mean, one of the things the President has done, he said to Secretary Thompson and he said to myself, "We can make some investments that will help us secure us from the microbes of terror, but in the same process help us secure us from the microbes of Mother Nature."
And as we build a national disease surveillance system, whether it's naturally occurring or terrorist directed, we become a safer and healthier nation. The critical case is get the information, understand it, and react to it as quickly as possible.
MS. LYTLE: Speaking of the importance of news organizations, it's been reported that border agents seized some information being shipped to the Associated Press that was unclassified and turned it over to the FBI without informing the news organization.
What is your view of this? And will other news organizations be subject to this?
SECRETARY RIDGE: I didn't hear the first part of the question, sorry. Well, it just seems to me if it's unclassified -- listen, in this town, even some classified information gets into the public domain (laughter), so you shouldn't be surprised that unclassified information gets into the public domain.
I guess the response to this, if I understand the question well enough, is that the news organization and the structure within the news entity may have a contrary view to the individuals who passed the information over to the FBI. But if it's not classified -- and I don't know the source of the information -- I don't know whether it was actionable information. But look, if a journalist out there had some information that was basically unclassified and could have either the option of sitting on it for a couple of days and writing a story, or if it was actionable enough that if they turn it over to somebody that can move on it quickly without jeopardizing their sources and the other principles they'd have to act on. From my point of view, if it's actionable and you can turn it over without violating any principles they have to act on -- from my point of view, if it's actionable and you can turn it over without violating any principles of your responsibilities - then good, let's act on it.
MS. LYTLE: My understanding is that it was information that was left over from the first World Trade Center bombing.
What can you tell us -- you mentioned Mohammad Al Rehaief -- and what can you tell us, has he met with Private Lynch since he's been here ? And what were the circumstances in granting him citizenship as you mentioned?
SECRETARY RIDGE: I know he, and I believe his family, had plans to meet with Private Lynch. I cannot tell you one way or the other if he has.
Susan, do you have any idea if that's current? I think the -- it was pretty clear to us that the accounts of this individual's personal heroism -- I mean, the notion we had an individual there who saw one of our soldiers being abused -- and there's something to the human spirit regardless of where you live, that it was so troubling and upsetting to this individual that he put his own life at risk, I'm sure not expecting any kind of reward or recognition. If that motivated him, so be it. We're grateful he did what he did, and he did it well and Private Lynch came back to us.
So, again, I think it's a good signal to send not only to his family but to the Iraqi people and to the world at large. We went into Iraq to liberate the people. One of your citizens, at great risk to themselves, helped liberate one of our soldiers. That's pretty much what Americans like to think our duty was going in. You helped us liberate one of our liberators. We show you the gratitude and affection of a grateful country, I think very appropriately.
MS. LYTLE: We have a number of questions about some of the civil liberties changes that have happened since September 11th.
This question asks, "Since we are fighting for freedom and liberty, how can you justify the loss of many civil liberties at home?"
SECRETARY RIDGE: Well, I think it's very important to take a look at -- I'm kind of curious if there was more specific -- it's a rather significant allegation. We're certainly more inconvenienced as a country. There have been some detentions that have occasioned an expression, a public expression of concern. But whenever there's the slightest incursion of anything we consider to be a civil liberty in this country in a transparent world called the United States of America with a system of government, it's not done unilaterally. It still has to be done in public, and it's done with and through the review of the third branch of government, the judicial branch of government.
So some of these matters I think the question is referring to have been taken to the court, and the President does have certain emergency powers at the time of war to do, to detain people, to do some things that the President and other have -- do not have when we're not in conflict. So again it depends on the -- if they were more specific, I'd try to give you a specific answer.
But let me tell you one thing we do have in our Department of Homeland Security relevant to the question. The Congress created two offices within the new Department that we will integrate at the front end of our organizational and policy and program efforts. There's a civil liberties officer and a privacy officer. And I think America needs to be assured that these men and women will be very much a part of the Department of Homeland Security. So that everything we do that may -- that touches on those areas will be vetted before we move ahead.
We're not going to surrender. If we surrender indirectly the freedoms that one million plus Americans have died for over the past couple hundred years, if we do that, then the terrorists secure a different kind of victory.
We can never afford to let them win indirectly what they'd like to somehow achieve directly. And certainly they'd like to see us change dramatically how we react to one another, and alter the liberties and freedoms we enjoy. We will not do that.
From time to time we will do things a little bit differently. Some people interpret those as being an infringement on civil liberties, but you don't do it unilaterally in this country. If somebody questions it, it's subject to review. And again, for the most part, under exigent circumstances during wartime, the courts have given our President and the Executive Branch a little more leeway than they might otherwise have. And we know that in the new Department we have those individuals working with us to protect privacy and civil liberties within our Department.
MS. LYTLE: Before I ask the last question I just wanted to present you with a certificate of appreciation for being here today and a National Press Club mug. And since this is your second appearance, that gives you a matched set.
SECRETARY RIDGE: I can drink with both hands now.
(Laugher)
MS. LYTLE: And the last question is, 'Have you bought any stock in duct tape companies?"
(Laugher)
SECRETARY RIDGE: Not enough.
(Laugher/Applause)
MS. LYTLE: I'd like to thank you all for coming today....
Add comment
Email to a Friend
