Edward Kennedy - Where now for the US?
Q. You have often been critical of the American mass media, and its influence on the American people. How do you think the network televisions have been handling the terrorist attacks?
A. I'm a strong believer in freedom of the press under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, television networks and journalists have been exercising that freedom responsibly in covering all aspects of the continuing crisis, often under very difficult conditions. I'm confident they'll continue to do so.
Q. Have the terrorist attacks led you to revise your views on immigration? Do you think immigration law ought to be tightened up? How does one strike the balance between the safety net Americans need and the openness and freedom for which they have fought?
A. Clearly, in these difficult times, the United States needs to strengthen its immigration laws to keep terrorists out of the country. But we need to do it and we can do it , in ways that respect and maintain the fundamental rights of immigrants and the basic liberties of all citizens. The terrorist attacks of September 11 make it an urgent priority to act as soon as possible. For example, government agencies need cutting-edge technology and up-to-date intelligence information to make quick and accurate decisions on whether to admit anyone to the United States, and whether visitors are complying with the terms of their visas. We also need to improve security at our borders with Canada and Mexico. Immigration is an indispensable part of national security, and we can take these steps in ways that are consistent with our heritage and history as a nation of immigrants.
Q. Are you afraid that domestic security measures will now be such that personal liberties and privacy might be affected? Will a choice have to be made between individual freedom and the prevention of terrorism?
A. It's a false choice. Just as in the case of immigration, we can strengthen law enforcement to prevent terrorism, without violating the fundamental rights and liberties of our people. The recently enacted anti-terrorism legislation gives law enforcement and intelligence officials needed new powers. Those powers are susceptible to abuse. I'm especially concerned that certain provisions may lead to the unfair detention of innocent persons. That's why the legislation included a so-called "sunset" provision. The new powers will expire after four years, and they won't be extended if abuses are demonstrated.
Q. Do you believe that the widely recognised though rarely admitted competition between the CIA and the FBI on some levels is partly responsible for the effectiveness of the terrorist attacks? Do you think the national intelligence and investigation services should be re-organised?
A. Co-ordination between these agencies needs to be improved, and so do all other aspects of law enforcement and intelligence. It's one of the prime responsibilities of the new Director of Homeland Security. The September 11 attacks demonstrated many gaps in many different aspects of the nation's security, and Congress and the Administration are working well together to close them.
Q. How have the events and the retaliation affected your day-to-day life as a Senator? How much of your time is now spent on terrorist attacks-related issues rather than the agenda you were pursuing prior to September 11?
A. Obviously, action has been deferred for the time being on many other important issues, while Congress and the Administration deal with the current crisis. But we're continuing to work together to complete action this year on far-reaching legislation to improve the nation's schools, and I'm hopeful we'll be able to return as soon as possible to meeting other key challenges. In the ongoing effort to meet the worldwide challenge of terrorism, America has had no greater friend than Prime Minister Blair, and all of us in the United States are grateful for his leadership and example.
22nd Nov 2001