>> another break. we of more to discuss. we will broaden the conversation and go to the middle east to stock about the arab spring. -- talk about the arab spring. cnn.com. much more from the historic constitution hall. [applause] welcome back to the cnn organization. >> ayman vice president with the heritage foundation. bashar al-assad christine and some of the people of -- regime and some of the people of syria. israel, jordan, and iraq. in your view, what are the interests of the united states in this region and what would>> herman cain, governor perry called for a no-fly zone for the u.s. over syria. would you support that? >> i would not. i would work with our allies to put pressure to be able to try to get our allies to stop buying oil from syria. zone. the most effective tools we have in any of these situations are strong military. and our own economic strength. this discussion about cutting enough time talking about the other part of the problem growing the economy. this administration has failed at growing economy. home but would not solve the problem until we have economic>> why would you support a no->> that is one of a multitude of actions that work very well from the standpoint of being able toi think there are a number of ways. when you put the no-fly zone opportunity to disband when they want to get out. i think if we're serious about about. syria is a partner in iran in exporting terrorism all across our part of the world and around the globe. if we're serious about iran, we have to be serious about syria as well. i think a no-fly zone is an option that we should be using. we should put them in place. question from twitter. "so many people view the arab spring as a good thing. given the recent violence, dowe have live pictures in cairo right now. thousands of people protesting the military regime. >> history will tell. we missed the persian spring. libya, we do not have any definable american interests. in syria, we have an american interest, israel. we need to remind the world what it means to be a friend and ally. at some point they're going to have enough material to make a weapon. we had a discussion of sanctions. everybody commented. sanctions are not going to work. the chinese will not play ball. i believe iran has decided they want to go nuclear. they have looked at north korea and libya. look where they are. let's let history be our guide. we saw the region transforming itself into something different. we sought changes in 1947. i think we do a disservice by jumping in too soon and taking of sides. -- up sides. our interest is to ensure iraq does not go nuclear. >> another question from the audience. >> i am from the american enterprise institute. the united states adopted a policy of disengagement with somalia. today, and al qaeda affiliate controls the territory and that country. what can the united states do to prevent a al-shabaab for imposing the same threat al qaeda did 10 years ago? >> you're talking about al qaeda? you have to understand who it is. al qaeda responds in a deliberate fashion. he said outside is inspired by the fact -- al qaeda is inspired by the fact we have a base in saudi arabia. we should have removed it. al qaeda response to that. they are annoyed with it. if you have a no-fly zone, that is an act of war. what if we had china put a no- fly zone over our territory? i do not think we would like that. we should practice a policy of good will and two other people. what about saying we do not do anything to any other country we do not have the due to last? when we have a no-fly zone over iraq, it meant to be a regime change. why should we spend more money to get involved in another ward? that is the internal affairs of other nations. we do not -- we have way too many already. this is looking for more trouble. why don't we mind our own business? [applause] >> that is a foreign policy. it is different than president obama's president obama's foreign policy says, america is just another nation with a flag. i believe america is exceptional. president obama says we're going to have a balanced military. i believe the superiority of our military is the right course. president obama says we have common interests. i do not agree with him. there are people who want to oppress other people. president obama thinks will have a global century, we have to un-american century where america leads the free world. president obama apologizes for america. it is time for us to be strong. if we are strong with egg military and economy, no one will try to attempt to threaten us or attacked us. >> are you with governor perry on declaring a no-fly zone? >> this is not the time for a no-fly zone. we need to use sanctions and covert actions to get to regime change in there. there are people who are shifting over, becoming part of the rebel effort. hawker -- bashar al-assad is getting pressure from turkey and saudi arabia. the arab league is putting pressure on him. that is the way to go. they have 5000 tanks in syria. maybe a no drives on. this is a nation which is not bombing its people. >> as i said, the no-fly zone is one of the options we have. you need to leave it on the table. this is not just about syria. this is about iran and those as a partnership in exporting terrorism. if we're going to be serious about saving is real, we had better get serious about syria and iran. >> another question from the audience. go ahead. >> and a visiting fellow. my question has to do with the unexpected. governor george w. bush was never asked about the threat from al qaeda yet it dominated his presidency. what issue do you worry about that nobody is asking about here or in any of the debates? >> give us a quick answer. >> i have spent a lot of time about central and south america. i am concerned about the militant socialists joining together with the islamists. i am concerned about the spread of socialism. this is administration the delay toward trade agreements, turning our backs on the hondurans, we took the side with hugo chavez and fidel castro. we have sent all the wrong signals. my first trip by would go to israel but then to central and south america. we need a solid hemisphere. the people south of our border need to know we are going to build a strong alliance. >> i want to do this quickly. >> i worry about overreaction, getting involved in another war when we do not have to. i worry about people and never understanding who the taliban is and why they're motivated. taliban does not want to come here. they want to kill us over there because all they want to do is give people who occupy their country out of their country just like we would. [applause] >> the big issue out there i happen to think it is china and how we're going to deal with china. communist china, when i think about ronald reagan and he said the soviet union was destined for the ash heap of history, he was correct. communist china is destined for the ash heap of history because they are not a country of virtues. when you have 35,000 abortions a day, the cyber security, those are great and major issues morley and security-wise. -- morally and security-wise. >> rick is right on china. the most significant threat is iran becoming nuclear. rick santorum is right with the issue that is not enough attention. latin america. congressman, we have an attack, on 9/11. there have been dozens that have been thwarted by our security forces. we have -- has a lot is working surround latin america -- hezbollah is working around latin america and poses an imminent threat. cards having been of ballistics analysts early in my career cyber attacks is something we do not talk enough about, and i believe that is an area we need to be concerned about. >> they came back after three years and said the greatest threat to the united states is a weapon of mass destruction, and probably from a terrorist. but as one of those three great threats. the second is an electromagnetic pulse attack and would destroy the ability to function and the next is the cyber attacks. all of those are out of our capacity to deal with. >> we need to remember that we want peace in iraq, and president obama is intending to give the piece away. this is a significant issue because we are taking the terrorist threat from the middle east and bringing it to the united states. we talked about al-shabaab. if israel. we just had two convictions of two women -- it is real. we just had two convictions of women. now the threat has come home and that is what we have to deal with. >> i guess i can say china because i know about the subject matter but they are in for trouble ahead. our biggest problem is at home. you can see it on every street corner. it is called joblessness and lack of opportunity. it is also called our trust deficit. an executive branch and has no leadership. institutions that have no power that we no longer believe in. we have no choice. we have to get on our feet domestically. >> thank you to all of you. we want to thank our partners. we want to thank heritage foundation. thank you very much for watching. the news continues next. our coverage continues right here on cnn. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> see more videos of the candidates on c-span and's website. from recent events to the earliest parts of their campaigns, read comments from social media sites and lead to media partners in the earliey primary and caucus states. >> earlier today the new hampshire and union leader announced it was endorsing newt gingrich. you can read the endorsement by clicking on c-span.org's campaign 2012 killing. now remarks from the publisher. this is about -- 2012. now remarks from the publisher. >> newt gingrich. we are in critical need of the leadership egrets has shown. how do you come to the conclusion to endorse newt gingrich? >> we have known him longer than any of the other candidates, and we have watched him and the others. we have had a lot of them with cs done taping the conversations, and we have watched the so-called debates and i thought it was clear that the guy the stands out from the crowd is mr. gingrich. >> what makes him stand out? >> his experience for one thing. you will recall he brought the republicans to power for the first time in 40 years and his inspiration with the conflict and his abilities to work for the democratic president. he and bill clinton did not seem high to iron but they managed do -- did not see eye to eye, but they managed to do away with a deficit. >> you know we do not i candidates with the shot by crowns. we look for candidates that are independent-minded hall and best equipped for the job during a -- for the job. what exactly did he say that led to that? think about some of the details of the conversations you'll have heard. >> he is not afraid of speaking his mind. pointing out his issue of long- term immigrants. his view is we have to look at history and shape a new turn for the country here and abroad. i am one of those skeptics that things when it is about domestic affairs i am looking over the fence to see where they stand on domestic affairs and foreign affairs, and i think newt gingrich would really know how to process information and make the right decision. >> we will give to your calls in just a minute. >> the primary is coming up in early january. joseph herman waited -- joseph is publisher of. give me a sense of what voters are feeling about candidates. where are the polls? >> they show mitt romney maintains a lead, which is understandable in new hampshire given that he was the governor of massachusetts not that long ago. the polls also show a tremendous amount of indecision on the part of the voters, and we said we thought now part of that is what has been the national media focus on the campaign, which has been to really magnify every mistake in a one of them wantmakes, so i think the last poll showed 16% of voters were committed to their candidate. we have seven weeks left before the primary. >> you said it was a clear-cut choice. explain the process you said he was one of the most visible. how do you get to the point you got to do? >> i have two grandsons and i throw the kids of thin air, and whichever one comes down without an -- with that name, that is our candidate. i do not mean to be cleaned, but there is no process. he has been in on all of the meetings though i have had the opportunity to meet with him and we came to the conclusion of a few weeks ago when it came down to three candidates and who was going to best describe the moment and not merely be a manager if he got into office, and we think sometimes gingrich goes off and people say what is he talking about? he is providing ideas and he has done so much work in terms of medical health and security and so months else. -- so much. >> what is your opinion on your endorsement? >> mitt romney is pretty much of favorite son. this is always a game of expectations, and i think expectations are going to be a little lower as a result of the conservative newspapers weighing in but he still has to win it by a solid margin, and the polls show gingrich and winning at a solid second, but the ones that are going to mix it up are mitt romney and ron paul. >> let's go to make way. they have endorsed newt gingrich's for president. good>> i was wondering the media have so much perceived power superior -- perceived power. why are they letting them vote for it? i don't understand why all this value is being given to the media and taking away from the media, and i am supposed to believe because this newspaper of the new hampshire. i would rather you through kids up in the air. it would be better to have less of a connection. >> we did get a point talking about power or perceived power. what do you make of the general thrust of his comments? >> i thought i made it clear. we do not have any great power. what we have is the ability for people to set a course based on what they have said, and they know us and where we come from, and they agree or disagree. the union leader said this or the union leader has been a strong conservative voice. the union leader has not always pick winners. in 2000 we paid steve for a superior to -- say we take steve ford's. i have talked to them since 1976. we do not go with some big shots either. we are stating one conservative voice. and we'll let everyone else have a voice, to a. we run morning letters to the editor than any paper in the country. >> newt gingrich, they right now, is not a perfect candidates. in this important election, newt gingrich has the vision to lead this country in these trying times. he is worthy of your support on january 10. the next call is matthew from whales in the uk. >> how are you this is a strange question. i just want an education but we have several different parties in the u.k. there is something like 500 million americans. why is it you only have two political parties? it just seems really strange that with such a large population you do not have any alternatives. i am wondering if you could help me. >> he touched on it when he said finances. these organizations are quite powerful and they raise a considerable amount of money. there is an effort to start an independent online third-party for president. there is a gentleman in the bush administration who has some backing for this and is going to try to get a name on 50's state ballots. i think that is going to be difficult to do. there are independents, and they crop up every four or eight years. a lot of democrats who were upset with ralph nader in 2004, because they think he took votes away from john kerry and before that out gore. -- al gore. the history of this country is last to occur was thin 1912 when teddy roosevelt challenged william howard taft, and all it did was to pave the way for a democrat to get in common and a tea party is now a strong voice in the republican party and some people have said if we do not like the republican candidate we're going to have a third, and newt gingrich argues, if you go with a third party, you are reelecting president obama so third parties do not happen because it takes too much money, which i think is a shame. >> we do have some comments from newt gingrich on november 18, and in this particular clip he talks about his prospects for beating president obama. >> i cannot wait to beat obama and if i do not vote for the only major candidate against him, i would reelect him. the desperate desire to beat obama is so great. that is the biggest advantage i have because if you say to people who would you like to see debate obama overwhelmingly they say me. >> a little bit from newt gingrich on prospects of beating president obama. what do you hear from handim that drives a conviction? >> i think he is a great student of history and america's core values and he has really grown up. he does not suffer fools gladly. sometimes he does not suffer friends gladly, but he has grown. he has learned to bite his tongue. i have seen in the republican debates -- i hesitate to call it that because it is not the back-and-forth, with the exception of the cnn 1, when the moderator gave them time to get their answers out. gingrich was head and shoulders above his rivals in batson debate format, really answering the question, not going after rival candidates not trying to score points with some memorable short answer, but saying what he really felt. i thought his could down of ron paul in the last debate when they were talking national security and the patriot act and paul was saying, you have to protect the rights of bad guys intent on blowing up american cities, and newt gingrich said that was not a good enough reason and ron paul said, we got now timothy mcveigh and and he said, we got him after he killed all those people. the point is we need to stop these islam as the extremists before they get a dirty bomb into an american city. >> we have lots more calls. i want to ask you whose ground game is the strongest right now on? >> and newt gingrich does not have much of a ground game at all. he is putting something together and he is going to have to spend considerable time here. i think this ground game is mitt romney. i think rick santorum who has a guy who has put together some strong and groundwork. beyond that, governor huntsman is here a lot but has not attracted much support, and ron paul is a magnetic force by himself and draws good crowds everywhere he goes. everybody has a good strategy. gov. harry is not to be -- governor careyperry is not to be counted out. he has a sackful of advertising money. >> we understand herman cain has rescheduled his interview for later this week. what are you looking to hear from herman cain? >> just to shore up his vision. his strength is to be the entire corporate business man, henry j. the anti-incumbent businessman. just because we endorse the candidate does not mean we do not want to hear what the guy has to say. we met mr. came before he came in earlier this year for a shorter chapped, and i found him to be quite an engaging guy who has a lot of interesting ideas. >> good morning. i just have a few comments. i voted for obama but now i am voting for the right because i am unsatisfied with the way things are. if you look at newt, he was the most intelligent. my problem is the trust factor. he had passed discretions, and what will make me want to trust him nonw is business as usual. ron paul is probably the most honest one for me, so i am still of an air about who to vote for. >> the trust factor dear your >> i think that is a negative for speaker gingrich. he was in office quite a while ago. everyone has a personal indiscretions in the background. his have been distorted as to a degree. we ran a story in which we got gingrich and his daughter to talk more openly than i have ever seen about this urban legend that he visited his dying wife in the hospital to serve her divorce papers, which is the kind of thing. now her mother is still alive and well. her mother asked for the divorce, not mr. gingrich's, and he took his daughters to see the bomb and decided to see her himself, and we did see the mother and decided to see her and they got in a heated argument, but so what? people go through divorces intend to do that. he is a flawed candidate but i think he is the best one. >> thank you for your wisdom. newt is the man. his philosophy is largely based on the fact it he is a historian, and i think i should remind people that became one vote short of getting us a balanced amendment, which we would not have these problems if he had gotten us that. he understands how this economy works. you cannot throw money at it. the only thing we can do is stop from hurting it so much. we have to make our environment and attractive environment for corporations to stay here are come here, and we have no control over the labor in china. the only thing our government has control over is how much we tax corporations and how much we regulate corporations. >> what else did he say to you that you appreciated. >> i was thinking back to some of the flaws the first lady mentioned. there is an interesting thing gingrich has done on his website. he has come down with his own attack on himself. everything you can hear from him he has put on his website and answered. he has made money off an advisory contact with freddie mac, and that is a horrible thing because he is a businessman. it seems to me the florida caller is correct. gingrich wants to get the capital gains tax down. he understands the levels of government that get in the way and if we move, they can do a better job of getting the economy to grow. >> mr. gingrich also talk about social security, and here is a listen to the former speaker. >> anybody who wanted to could shoes of personal savings account. -- could choose of personal savings account. you are allowed to put your half of the social security tax into your account. it turns out half the amount comes with two or three times as much money. >> but as a point he has made quite a bit. our folks responding to it two months -- to it much? >> i do not know. herman cain has been big on social security change, soup. the region -- change too. we talk about medicare and the prescription drug benefit and he ticked off a bunch of fraud and waste and savings that could be made, and he said, he taught to visa and american express about having them in charge of making payments rather than the federal government, and it was quite a substantial amount. is that kind of thing that is outside the box we are in. >> i what 0 week prior. -- thought was a week prior. he is in an effort to make this post. there are two issues. i wanted to bring up immigration, because newt gingrich made quite a bit of news with his comments about immigration. what are your thoughts? >> they are running a national campaign, but they have to stick with one theme. their theme is, to heck with iowa. we are not going to invest there. they may have a tough time in new hampshire, so they are pulling in on iowa. the second part of your question? >> about the immigration, mr. gingrich made that drew a lot of attention. >> it was not a change about his position. the speculation is because people are paying attention to handim. i have a bit of a bias against the media which focuses of it on whoever is rising on the republican side and they start taking shots on him. the rich did not say -- gingrich did not see amazon. new -- amnesty. he said is very elegantly. if you live in a community and you are a grandfather and pay taxes and have a job we are not likely to raise tax dollars trying to identify a year and throw you out whereas if you are a newcomer, those are the ones you want to go after whereas he was saying it was a path toward legality, and most people have conceded you cannot identify and the court 11 million people -- and deport 11 million people. the obama administration has decided to deport practically nobody. the police chief has thrown up his hands. he tells me if he turns over to immigration services he kicked them out. i st. he has a good idea. >> -- i think he has a good idea. >> i just have one question for you. as a newspaper how can you endorse someone who his own party kicked out as speaker of the house because he has no ethics? that is all i want to know. >> gingrich was clear of funds -- cleared of ethics charges raised at the time. he speaks his mind, and is very pointed about his ideas. the republican party wanted him to step down, which he did but there are a lot of leaders who have been unpopular. and churchill comes to mind. harry truman. you have to look outsideat who he insistss. >> he made millions by building his trouncing brand -- greg is coming from jacksonville, florida. you are on the line. >> i have seen a sees them listeners since its initial state year -- a c-span listener since its initial to view. i have more suggestions. one is to allow more callers regardless of political persuasion. it is a prolonged kind of discussion you do not allow them to ask their questions as if we do not realize what is going on. regarding some of the things he was saying, one of the first things i was looking at is that a union leader has never endorsed someone on the progress of some liberal side. i want to get to one of the fact. his daughter may have tonight but there are several things. he was dating his aide at the time he was castigating bill clinton about the situation with monica lewinsky. he has not denied the kind of money he has taken from fannie mae and when he has criticized them. that is hypocrisy, and to bring him back in this reincarnation newt gingrich has always been a flame thrower. he has been a divider ever since he got to congress in 1992, and i do not see how the media cannot begin to challenge him on some of these things about his moral base, about some of the unethical things he has done. is this what we are looking for? >> do you want to take a crack at that, emma? >> first you should let the callers be heard. i think you are doing that. second the perspective that he has been listening since 1979. so have i., and i think sees them as a great job of mixing of the callers. -- c-span does a great job of mixing up the colors. mitt romney is going to be seen as the guy who is richer than anyone on the republican side by at least six years. he is a savvy businessman. they have employed more than 30 people. it is not all going in and the bridge across -- being rich -- gingritch's pocket. as far as hypocrisy goes, i will grant you that every politician in this country to one degree or another is hypocritical if it means saying one thing and doing something else. i hope -- i do not think he is exempt from that, nor do i think he is the leader of the. >> in "the new york times"" he writes president obama as it did not the -- -- as a pinata -- we also wanted to show an eye on where he talks about the president in new hampshire. [applause] >> i am confident we can steer ourselves out of this place. we need a rescue plan. we need to provide relief for homeowners. if we keep talking about the economy, we are going to lose. >> i am going to do something for government. i call it the smaller simpler approach to government. i am going to get rid of obamacare. it is killing jobs. we have a moral responsibility not to spend more than we take in. i will make sure of? -- america is a job-creating machine. >> i approve this message. >> they are writing that mitt romney is being attacked. any take on that salmont? >> every word in that ad is the word of the office. unfortunately, the words are actually a " from the campaign in 2008. it is being turned against him because he turned against that died in 2008 -- against the guy in 2008. if you're going to spend money on a targeted arrived i have not read his column relative to obama, but he is certainly going to be a pinata. this is now his. he has got to live or perish. >> he writes, we will continue to take more calls. woodcliff, ohio, you are up now. >> i would like to ask a question not just this gentleman, but i challenge the republican establishment. why are you not having buddy roemer as an opportunity for these debates? great speech. rumor has it right. >> another name we have not talked about. >> what do you make of him? >> it is certainly unfair that not all of the candidates get on televised debates but i think there are 40 or 50 of done -- of them. how does one go about putting all those people on a debate and expecting people to not have to get married and live their lives? it does not work, and i sympathize with the networks. we have been involved in a couple of things. you can get in trouble if you do not have the exacting criteria for everyone to get in, and the networks and my guy look at poll numbers, which is terrible, because you cannot get recognition without getting recognition, but they also look at how legitimate the candidate is in terms of having an established organization within the state in which they are running, has not only filed papers but has really made a commitment and governor johnson, who did make one of the televised debates and a couple of others have been on that where they did not have an of criteria -- have enough criteria to put them in. . >> good morning, mr. and mrs. dowler. i appreciate that you may be nervous. last time you gave evidence was a difficult one. i won't ask detailed questions about your statement. mr. jay will do that. but can i begin by asking you, we will know it was the revelation publicly in july of this year that milly's phone had been hacked by people acting on behalf of the news of the world that led to the setting up of this inquiry. can i ask how you feel about that? >> i think the gravity of what happened needs to be investigated. i think there is a much bigger picture, but i think that given we learned about the hacking revelations just before the trial for the murder of our daughter and it was extremely important that we understood and people understand exactly what went on in terms of these practices to uncover this information from that situation. >> prior to your discovering about milly's phone, did you read stories about other people including well known people whose phones had also been hacked into? >> yes. we had been aware of gordon taylor and certainly away followed that in the media and were aware of the celebrity awareness viewpoint that would be an issue. of course not realizing until we were informed about hacking in our situation that it was spread much wider. >> how did you feel about the fact that there were other than people whose phones were hacked? what effect about that have on your case? >> fundamentally everybody is entitled it a degree of privacy in their private lives and it is a deep concern that our private life became public. but other people who are in the public eye, their private life became public as well. >> away we know that uyou instructed mr. lewis the solicitor. can you explain how you did? >> it was during the trial just before the trial we found out about milly's phone being hacked. when we were given that information it was terribly difficult to process because what do you do with that information when it is in your mind? i worried about the forthcoming trial but also aware of what happened with sienna miller and thinking we ought to get representation. but was frightened about doing that because away didn't have any money so i didn't know how we were going to do that. then i found somebody on the internet and left a message and he phoned and said come see me. >> what was your objective in going to see mr. lewis? >> very much to be in a position to respond to what would possibly become quite a public situation, how would we deal with that? because we had been given that information but no advice to what to do with it but recognizing of course have dynamite information and when made public suddenly it got very excited and very moat invitationed invitationed about the whole situation. >> can i ask you just a question about your legal representation? did you have the money to pay for legal advice? >> no we didn't. >> how were you able to pursue a complaint against news international? >> when we went to see mark which i have to say was a difficult thing to do because it was during the trial and it was like we've got to do this bob, because away need somebody to represent us and literally dragged me to that meeting and he said you don't need to worry about the money, i will represent you come what may. and we were able to use the c.f.a. agreement. otherwise we wouldn't have been able to proceed. >> we know that the news of the world settled your claim in all-of this year. as you heard my opening submissions and submissions of the other media representatives, what if anything would you like to say to news international now? >> well i think given the gravity of what became public the main knowledge about what happened about our phone hacking situation and the circumstances under which it took place, one would hope news international and other media organizations would look carefully at how they procure and obtain information about stories. because obviously the ramifications are far greater than just an obvious story in the press. >> it was used as an opportunity to put things right in the future and have some decent standards and adhere to them. >> thank you very much. if you just wait there, mr. jay will have some further questions. >> it is obviously fitting that you should be the first witnesses. we would ask you first to deal with paragraph seven of your witness statement. this is the private walk which occurred in may of 2002. do you follow me? >> yes. >> would you tell us about that in your own words? you said it was not a formally organized walk. what was its purpose, please? >> it was about seven weeks after milly had again missing and a lot of the initial media hype had died down a little bit and it was a thursday that was the day she'd gone missing. it was quite a sunny afternoon. and she would have come home about 4:00. i remember calling bob and thinking actually he had again off to london on that day into the office and i said to him why don't you come back to walton and i will meet you there and we will do that walk back. because so many questions are just bumping around in your head, why didn't anyone see her, et cetera et cetera. it was a very last-minute arrangement. so, it was maybe an hour or two before that i phoned bob and said i want to do this so i will meet you at the station and we will walk back together. previously there had been a presence at the station but how it had calmed down and when we got there it was empty. there was no one there. simply one of the police officers drops me off the station, i met bob and we just basically quietly retraced her steps steps. and no one was really around so it was very much like the day she had gone missing. we put out missing leaflets with her photograph and telephone number on. and that number had been changed. and i was checking the poster number if the rate poster was up and as i walked around i was sort of touching the posters. and we walked back to our house which is maybe 3/4 of a mile. that was on thursday. then on the sunday that photograph appears in the news of the world and i can remember seeing it and i was really cross because we didn't see anyone. they obviously had taken the picture with some telephoto lens. how did they know we had done that walk that day and it felt like such an intrusion into ra really private grief moment. >> yes. you were completely unaware at the time that performance were watch being you? >> yes. >> we've the article. i'm not going to be asked that it be put on the screen. we can draw our own inferences as to where the photographer must have been. some distance of course in front of you. >> yes. i don't know where he would have been to take those pictures. maybe in a parked car down the road somewhere. i don't know. >> i think you can see from the picture we are basically just walking along, completely immersed in the amendment is the honest phrase i would use. then sally saw the poster around decided to check him. >> did you make any kphreupbt about this beyond telephoning the liaison officer? >> no. i skwrusjust phoned -- i did phone and had a bit of a rant about how did they get this picture. but in the scheme of things at the time more importantly was the fact that milly was missing. >> yes, of course. >> that was more time-consuming. >> that wouldn't have prevented your mind to koplcome back about the complaint? >> not at that time. >> we agreed we will do our press communication through the police. >> paragraph 10 of your statement you referred to situations when you were approached by journalists and public people. >> it was quite an event for people to knock on the door. we established that we wouldn't do interviews. we would do everything through the surrey police for the simple reason of not wanting to create any media war between a particular publication having access access let's say an exclusive. but certainly at the end of the day our response was the same and always has been the same. and even recently we have been doorsteped. but i think the thing that was probably quit difficult on our own property i was on our front drive putting something in the recycling bin and suddenly somebody popped from behind the hedge and approached me and i remember it specifically because it was the time that the head of the investigation of the police team was changed and he said to me what do you think of the surrey investigation being changed. and i mean, really it was sort of what possibly am i going to say? un unfortunately i had the fore site that i'm not going to say anything and i said i had no comment and i think somebody said in the paper he had no comment or something to that effect. but for the simple reason that obviously just to try to avoid giving specifics of things. one question and the next question and then you are engaged in a discussion and that de facto becomes an interview, doesn't it? >> yes, every time someone went out the front door you had to be on guard because somebody might be there and they would come up to you when you least expect it and so as you are lifting something in and out of the car and they will fire a question at you without introducing themselves and you have to train yourself not to answer. >> yes. maybe you feel the tack technique. >> i think that it is quite concerning because at the end of the day you are afraid it open your front door because you are faced with a question. and however you respond to that question might then lead to a head line of one lane or two and that is difficult to deal with. we have always tried to be polite and courteous and leave it at that. >> of course i have to ask you next about milly's phone and the voicemail interception. you deal with it in paragraphs 13 to 15. in trying to fix this into the criminology you think this must have been in april or may of 2002. is that correct? >> yes. it was quite soon after she had gone missing. because where she actually was abducted is opposite this building down by the station. there were cameras on the building so everything focused around the cctv cameras. so we were asked to go up to look at the cctv to see if we thought somebody on it was milly. do you want me to tell you about what happened? >> yes, particularly -- first of all, you said you were againphoning in to milly's voicemail quite regularly. >> yes. >> was there anything else? >> at first we were able it leave messages, then her voicemail became full and then you rang and just got the recorded "we are enable to leave messages at the moment." and i was used to hearing that. and we had gone up to the building to look at the cctv and we were sitting down at the reception and i rang her phone and it clicked through on to her voicemail and i heard her voice. and it was just like she could picked up the voicemail, she is alive. and it was then really. with when we were told about the hack being that is the first thing i thought. >> your immediate reaction was to phone jemma? >> yes, we spoke to jemma. then it died down because you are thinking is that the only reason it could have happened or what have you. i thought i could hold out hope because she picked up her voicemail. >> that is certainly a reasonable inference. can you tell us anything about the police reaction when you shared that with them? >> all i can remember is that they told us they put some credit on her phone because she was very low and had no credit on her phone. i can only remember them telling us they had put some credit on her phone. >> when you told them that you managed to get through the voicemail message did that excite any particular reaction from the police? >> i can't relevance remember that. >> i think one of the fellows was with us but unfortunately that is nine years ago it is hard to remember the details. >> whether it had an impact on the police investigation is a matter of speculation. >> something for them isn't it? because at the end of the day it was their investigation. >> then much later opbn, this was shortly before the criminal charge, you learned from the police that the voicemail had been hacked into by the news of the world, april of this year? >> yes. >> specifically that what we were told. >> what was your immediate reaction for that piece of news? >> well we got called to say that the police wanted to see us. and to tell us what it was about. and as soon as i was told it was about phone hacking literally i didn't sleep for about three nights because you raceway play everything in your mind and just thinking that makes sense now, that makes sense. then we went along to the meeting and i said to them about this instance and also about walking back from the station were the two things that at the time i thought this is odd. something untoward is going on. >> in your mind you made the media connection into the dialing into the voicemail and also a possible connection with the private walk you told me about? >> yes. >> the only thing to remember of course is the walk had nothing to do with milly's phone. it could only have come from -- >> our phones or our own phone. >> thank you for that. and you know for obvious reasons namely the fact of the criminal trial this is information you could not share more widely until the trial was included. and we also know that the revelation, the 4th of july of this year fitting to the chronology. let me ask you about some wider questions. you refer to the double edged sword. i suppose you had to engage to some extent in order to assist the police in their inquiry. on the other hand it was important to remain private. is there anything else you would like to assist the inquiry about the double edged nature of what you might have had to do at that time? >> i think in essence in our situation you have to remember we were really really desperate for some information about milly. so the press were in a position to be of help. they could get the information out that she was missing and lots of information came in to the police headquarters. but on the other hand being questioned and being doorsteped and everything else that is associated with it and all the letters you get books, films, spwaus. >> i think the point to make just now is i followed the media over the years quite a bit more than sally does and i certainly recognize that it is very important that we would try to be as consistent as we could in dealing with the media and not to actually give any one party a particular position or wrangle for the very reason about not wanting to create another set of issues to deal with. because in fact in the early days, the first six months, of course we were in a very desperate situation and in fact it was unprecedented in your normal life for ms. people and how do you deal with these things? so we tried as best we could to be as balanced as we could about it but recognizing that things are outside of your own control. >> plainly well outside your own experience. you had to rely on your own judgment in an entirely unique situation. did you get any help? >> very much so. they were brilliant. they really helped us. and they were coordinating things. they took the majority of the burden off of us. >> and we chose that route as well. >> thank you. i'm not going to ask you about the settlement of your civil claim. you had a meeting with mr. mr. rupert murdoch, which i think was probably about the 12th or 13th of july. i'm sure that was a difficult meeting for both of you rbgs is that right? i mean both of you and mr. murdoch. >> yes, it was a very tense meeting. >> and he made it clear that what had happened was totally unacceptable, didn't he? >> he did, yes. yes, he was very sincere. >> you refer to a letter about a meeting with the company and the prime minister. i don't need to go into it unless you like. could i ask about the section of your statement that deals with the future. you touched on it a little bit, mr. dowler. this inquiry you consider about the press culture and ethics, looking back and looking to the future. if you are here it make recommendations this is your chance. is threre neglect you would like to -- anything you would like to suggest to the lord justice leveson at this stage? >> we were asked the question when we visited the prime minister and we are ordinary people so we have no experience in such a public light situation. and certainly no experience from a media controlled media involvement situation. that has always been on our best judgment as to how we dealt with test matters. >> it was more the extent of it exposed and the inquiry could make the decisions. >> yes, it appears it the inquiry that your judgment has been extremely well exercised under difficult situations and we appreciate that. but do you have anything more general that you would invite the inquiry to think about? >> i think we will leave that up to you. >> how very generous of you. thank you. >> i have no further questions for you. i'm extremely grateful for your evidence and the way in which you kindly and frankly answered my questions. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> i think you were acting for the dowlers. are there any further questions you want to ask? >> i have no further questions. >> thank you very much for coming. thank you. >> thank you. >> we will break five minipulates before we -- minutes before we continue. >> certainly, five minutes. >> good morning. i will call the next witness, ms. smith. >> i joan smith affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> mrs. smith, i will say to you as i said before thank you very much indeed for agreeing to give evidence evidence. this was a voluntary activity and i'm conscious that it exposes personal matters that affect you in the public domain. >> good morning mrs. smith. would you state your full name? >> john smith. >> you provided a witness statement to the inquiry. we can see that on the big screen. before i ask you any killed questions about your is the -- detailed statement can i ask you to confirm that statement was to the best of your knowledge and belief. >> yes. i will start with who you are. we have the witness statement in front of them. for those that don't have the statement could you tell us a little bit about who you are and your career history. >> i have been a journalist more than 30 years. i started my year in national newspapers on the sunday times. i worked for the sfpb thames insight -- sunday times doing stores like the iranian embassy siege siege. after that i decided to go freelance and i have written for a lot of national newspapers, the guardian both the independences. mainly the columnist, the evening standard. i also write backs. i'm the author of six published novels and my most famous book is about woman hating. i also wrote for penguin a back about secular morality. then i do my human rights work for -- from 2000 to 2004 i chaired the english pen writing committee which was set up to promote freedom of expression and look after imprisoned writers and their families. at any time we were looking out for about 35050 writers in places like syria china, trying to make representations on their behalf. we started sending people to observe them trials if they were in court. in 2005, i went and observed the trial of a man in istanbul. in 2008 i got involved in a project in sierra leone collecting becomes. i did that with the times. they gave me the chance it launch an appeal for children's backs. we werable to collect about a quarter million to 300,000 children's becomes that we shipped out to set up school libraries libraries. so i do both of those things. >> thank you very much. i want to talk about the paragraph 11 of your statement. this is the work that you did with the human rights policy department campaigning for freedom of expression for journalists around the world. could you tell us about that work. >> robin cook was a friend of mine. in 2001, just before the election he asked me if i would chair his last big speech as fortune secretary. we didn't know it was the last big speech obviously. afterwards he wanted to talk about how he put into dimension the ethical dimension of his policy that was a statement he made after he became foreign secretary in 1996. afterwards i met both his specialist and head of rights of the human rights department and they said we want more involvement with n.g.o.'s. and they sucked that if i was thinking of sending -- sucked if i was sefrpding somebody to a trial in a place like belarus which is a frightening thing to do that we could liaise with the foreign office and they would put you us in touch with ambassadors and we set up quite an effective system. i remember there was a trial in bell raus in particular -- belarus, i asked somebody to go observe the trial and they got a lot of help from the british ambassadors in minsk which was fortunate because it was a very unpleasant scene and the court was cleared by the local version of the k.g.b. and there were talks every year on the future of turkey's education to join the e.d.u. and we did a lot of monitoring of human rights in turkey and we would take part in the talks with the foreign office and give lists of things like all the books that were banned in turkey and whether it was going up or down and whether journalists were still being imprisoned and so on. >> obviously a lot of interesting work. tell us briefly how important do you consider freedom for expression of journalists? >> it is essential. the reason i got involved in this work is that it seems that a tree press is absolutely a cornstone of civil society. if you don't have a free press, which is able it call -- to call politicians and big companies, corporations and hold people to account then you have problems. i always felt i was lucky to pursue a career in a country where we did have a free press because i'm aware of what happens to journalists in countries where there isn't one. >> do you consider yourself to be celebrity? >> not in the least. i'm a very minor public figure in the sense that i write backs and increasingly people had write books are expected to turn up at festivals and talk about where we get our ideas and things like that. but i'm a writer. i can speak in public and i have. but i don't think that i'm somebody whose private legislative would be as much interest to the reading public. i'm sure the things i writ for people who write my novels would be baffled to know who i was. >> moving on to the next question about your personal life, i really don't want to ask about your personal leaveife save one. for a number of years you were in a lip relationship with denis macshane. >> yes. >> this is probably a delicate question but was there anything illegitimate or secretive about that? >> he was my participate from 2003 to 2010 and i was always quite open about it. just before this before i spoke spoke, we had been to a conference in venice that denis was speaking at in early 2004. and i remember we had dinner with the former prime ministers of italy and swede and that doesn't seem to be a way to conduct a private relationship. >> you see at paragraph 27 you rarely mention your private life when you are write a column. can you tell me whether you ever have discussed your personal or private life in your column and, if so, what would you typically say? jobs very rarely. i remember once denis rang me and said that he and three friends had just heard about something and i happened it call the independent that day and i was talking about the changes the way in which aging has change and how people of my discrimination do things that at ages our parents would never dream of. but it was sort of a half accidence about my partner rang to say he climb a mountain with three friends in their late 50's. that was all. >> you mentioned a moment ago that you have appeared in something. when did you first become aware that uyou might have been accessed? >> in april of this year when i got an e-mail from a detective. >> can you tell us about what happened and what you did? >> i arranged to. -- i got in touch with the detective and wrote back his e-mail and said i gather you are trying to get in touch with me and here are my details, my home address, telephone number and mobile phone. he e-mailed back and said those are all the details we have in the notebook and he invited me it a meeting and i went to my lawyer to organize the meeting. i sat next to one of them and it was kind of the ceremonial unveiling of the notes and i'm sure lots of people have again through this. you are asked we are going to show you some pages from the notebook and can you tell us if you recognize anything. and of course the very first passenger my name address -- my page my name and as he made note that i was writing for both the independence and the times. what seemed significant to me and what i found profoundly shocking is that ehe seems to have been a very obsessive note taker and as well as writing the name in the corner of the paper he made a note of gates and my -- dates and my name and address appear on the 5th of may of 2004 approximately six weeks after denis's eldest daughter was killed in a sky diving accident in australia that had attracted a huge amount of publicity. was incredibly shocked that in that period when denis was bee referred it sis not -- bee referred it is not an easy time that the news of the world was interested in both of us to ask him to listen to our voicemails. >> can you tell us what your reaction was when you saw this that they had access to your voicemail? >> i'm amazed by how shocked i was because in my journalistic live i had a couple of bad experiences. i was caught in a riot in sierra leone and i recognize the impact of shocked but then i was in a daze. he had found out and made a note that we were going to spain i was going to a pen conference to meet other people other writers who work for freedom of expression. i was going to barcelona and denis was coming out the following weekend and he was going to make a speech in spain and we were arranging to meet up and i was amazed by the detail of notes that he had made about flight times and a note saying her to him so it appeared that he had been getting information from my voicemail. and the police said to me is there any way that he could have gotten this information legitimately. and given that it was about two months after the bombings in madrid when there was a very high level of security around government ministers it seemed unlikely but i remember leaving that meeting and i had to go to a meeting in the city and my mind was just buzzing. and you suddenly start thinking does that slain something. and i arrived -- explained something. and i arrived at the meeting early and the managing director said are you all right and i realize it was complete shock. i had no idea that was happening. >> i have asking else about that perd. what sort of things were you writing? you said you were writing columns. what sort of things were you writing then? >> i was writing a lot for the times. they would ask me to do additional things and i did an interview for westwood and my name was on the cover. i was also writing columns. i think it was the 8th of april of 2004 -- >> do you have that document of in front of you? it was handed out to everyone this morning. >> yes. i wrote a column headed and i think there had been a huge amount of interest in the marriage of the beckhams at that point and they would tried to contained of -- kind to negotiate their way through personal crisis crisis. so i wrote a column saying -- i suppose what was in the back of my maintained was the intrusive reporting of the death of tkoeupb denis's daughter saying celebrities think they can kind of control the media and keep them trendily and actually the appetite of stories is so remorseless that they lose control of the story. so i was saying that i found it very disturbing that we have gone from a situation where the idea of privacy used to be a shield for hypocrisy and people would do terrible things and pretend they were upstanding. we moved from that it a situation where people have almost no privacy. so i was saying in this column in the times i find it shocking that no matter what happens it people whether it is bereavement or a marital problem you are expected to deal with it in the public eye. i wrote this in the times and four weeks later the news of the world asked him to fire me. >> what is the link in your mind if any? >> i'm not sure there is one. from what i have been able to understand about mr. marques's activity and the number of names it has been said that it was on an industrial scale and it could happen to almost anybody. you don't have to be an incredibly famous actor or actress. you just have to be coming into the orbit of somebody that is well known. and i think that there is such a gap between the cultures of the two parts of the press what i think of as the serious press that i write for and tabloid press. but it wouldn't occur to tell to look at what i was writing and think about the arguments. >> you have had a few months to digest the information that was accessed. how do you feel about that now? you talked about having your phone accessed when mr. mcshane lost his daughter. >> i think there is sort of a wide lesson to be drawn from this. i think i mentioned this at one of the seminars. it seems to me that tabloid culture is so remorseless, its appetite is so unable to be filled that the people involved have lost any sense of dealing with human beings. when i was doing investigative journalism i often had to go knock on the door of somebody who was bee reefaoef -- bee reefed. but it was not because i wanted to know. there was always a purpose which i could explain and say you may not want to talk to me. if you don't, i will go away. actually nobody ever did say go away. this is just everything has become a story and we are all caricatures. i think the tabloid press we are just two dimension a.m. which is fodder -- dimensional, which is fodder for stories. >> we have articles about your relationship with denis mcshane. you see as recently as 2010 they asked about that relationship and it had ended earlier than tkaes. what is your view is that appropriate? >> it depends entirely on the context. it seems to me that there is a difference between somebody who is in the public eye, like a politician who makes what i call traditional values part of his platform. if somebody says the saefrpbgtity of marriage is -- sanctity is important and people shouldn't have cohabitive relationships and then they pose with their family in their election listen, then i think a -- election literature. but neither denis or i ever invited the press into our lives. quite the on assessment on each occasion -- and this has gone on at a low level about 20 years -- i have been approached and they come in this chummy way can you tell us about your relationship with so and so and i would say i'm a journalist. if i wanted to put my private live in the public domain i could do it myself and i would get the facts right. why would i need you. i would try to be fairly pole late-- polite. and in december when i got this call it was only a few months after i had left denis, and i don't think that the journalist who contacts you realizes or cares that you are in quite a vulnerable stage and you are still processing the feelings of a long relationship ended and it was not very nice. i had been running and i had removed my clothes and i got this person from the mail saying we gather you and tkoeufrpbs -- tkoeufrpbs and i thought i'm naked before the tabloid press and why should i be. >> some people might say that the press are entitled to relationship about the relationship of public figures regardless of whether they make statements about the virtues of family life and so on. what would you say to that? >> i think it is a confusion, the old confusion of not understanding the difference between what interests the public and what is in the public interest. i think private life is a commodity. i wrote a book about secular ethics and morality and i think adults lead their lives in lots of different ways. for example, i think that the legalization of civil partnerships of gay and lesbian people is a great advance and i think marriage should be available to them. i think adults lead their way in quite a sophisticated way and they don't use one model. yet the tabloid press lives in a anyone 50's -- 1950's world where everyone is supposed to get married and anything outside of that is a story. >> i want to ask about an article about 19th of june, 2005 the headline the secret divorce and [inaudible]. the other article is -- let's deal first with that one. that was confirming that your relationship was happening. was the divorce secretly divorced? >> i didn't know you could be secretly divorced. i thought you had to go to court and it was listed and so on. i think that there is interesting confusion between secret and private. i think denis -- i don't want to speak for him but i think he regarded his divorce as a private matter and didn't go around telling journalists. i can't see how it was secret. >> the other article where you were contacted last year in the gym and talking about your relationship ending. did you complain about either of the articles at the time? >> no it didn't cross my mind. >> why did it not cross your mind? >> because i have seen too many versions of press regulation in this country, the press council and current p.c.c. and i don't think that they are adequate bodies to deal with this kind of problem. by the time you complain to them the article is out there and all your friends have read it. so you are not going to get much in the way of redress. >> i have been asked to put one other question to you. it is about an article you wrote in the "evening standard" on the 5th of december 2001. i will put a copy in front of you you. this appears to be an article that you wrote in 2001 about [inaudible] and her relationship relationship. you discussed the issue between the two parties at that time. and set out at the end some views. i wrote about their private life. if as you saeuy the tabloid becomes overzealous about private lives why don't you write yourself about celebrities? >> because i have been writing since 1990's about the mistake i think that celebrities make of putting too much of their private life in the public domain. i didn't go doorstep them or ring them up or ask them about their private life. they put that in the public domain. if you read the article, i'm saying this is a very dangerous thing to do. i said the same thing about the late princess diana. people think they can put their private legislative in the public domain and still control what is said about them. what worries me is that given the underlying nature of the tabloids somebody at the time elizabeth hurley was pregnant and i thought she was in a vulnerable stage and i thought it was actually quite a dangerous track chefs on and i -- she was on and i talk about the kind of under layinglaying nature in our culture of people who are beauty and base their careers on their appearance and the danger that they lose their reputation to lose an old fashioned world so i'm happy when i get a chance to smuggle feminist ideas in the popular press. >> thank you very much. you said in your statement you have continued to fight for the press. in your experience can i ask you this. i want to know whether you have any views on the current system of regulation. does it work? and do you have any views on what you would like? >> no i don't think it does work. i'm very opposed to any. in terms of regulation i think that there needs to be a successful body to the p.p.c. that is not dominated by editors and has more representation from outside. i think there ought to be things like like, if newspapers don't take part in this i think they should lose their exemption. there should be a carrot and stick of taking part. i think there ought to be a much faster writer reply. i think it should also take in mediation in other situations like where libel might be involved. i think it needs to be a much more complex and capable body. on top of that i think that what needs to happen is a change in culture. i think that we do have a tab lid culture which i -- tabloid culture that is almost infantile in its attitude to private and section. it is my impression that tabloid hacks go around like children who just discovered the astonishing information that their parents had sex and they can't resist peeking around the door to see it and the rest of us get on and the obsession of sex in private legislative is remorseless and pitiless in terms of what it does. >> is there anything that you would like to add? >> i don't think so. >> i have a couple. you have identified on a number of occasions the ethics of what you have called the tabloid press press. is there or should there be any difference to the ethical considerations which are put into the work of reporters by any section of the media? >> no i don't think there should and i think that is the real problem. when i first started out as a journalist i wasn't particularly aware of any codes of ethics but i knew why i had become a journalist. i wanted to change the world. and i thought that at times it might be necessary to break the law. during one investigation i was threatened. but i think the that things have diverged much too far and it should be possible to have a vibrant tabloid press that does the kind of things say the daily mirror did a few decades ago when the tabloids saw themselves as crusading papers. but that is not something they see as doing particularly any more. so there is a separation which i think is damaging. a lot of the time people like me who wraeut for what i was talking about earlier i feel like a different breed from the ethics the people who work on tabloid papers. >> the second question is this. you have seen the taoerlmaterial the police assembled from the mull keur -- mulcaire note becomesbooksnotebooks. do you see any sense of you being targeted because of you or because you were an adjunct of mr. mcshane? >> i think the latter. i think the death of his daughter made his profile higher and they got interested in him and once they got interested in him they got interested in me so i suppose i was sort of collateral damage. >> thank you very much. >> we should break before the next witness. >> i think that is sensible. i'm perfectly content just to let people have a pwraebgbreak. i will say the same to witnesses that are coming. this is not always an entirely plenty ordeal. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> today a look at the future of healthcare legislation with susan dentzler then a discussion about the defense authorization bill. later we will klatt with carol rosenberg of the "miami herald" on the cost of operating the guantanamo bay detention center. that is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> the official white house christmas tree arrived friday. first lady michelle obama and sasha and malia got a look at the tree as it arrived at the north portico. the tree from wisconsin will be decorated to honor military families. >> what do you think? do you like [inaudible] >> happy holidays.