Pentagon Regular Briefing, October 17, 2000

DoD News Briefing



Tuesday, October 17, 2000

Presenter: Rear Adm. Craig R. Quigley, DASD PA



(Also participating was Rear Adm. Stephen R. Pietropaoli, Navy chief
of information.)


Quigley: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.



I'd like to welcome nine graduate students from American University to
today's briefing. They are covering our brief today as part of their
course on public affairs reporting and to experience how the
Department of Defense interacts with the news media. Welcome to you
all.


Secretary Cohen will participate in the memorial service tomorrow to
honor the dead and missing sailors who served aboard USS Cole. The
service will be at 11 a.m. at Pier 12 at the Norfolk Naval Station.
The memorial service is open to all military members, civil service
employees, retirees, and their families. In a call shortly before I
came into the press room, our understanding is that the president does
plan on attending the service tomorrow, but I will defer to the White
House to make that more definitive. But that is our working
understanding at the moment.


And while local officials -- mayors and whatnot -- and selected guests
have been invited, space limitations preclude an invitation to the
general public at large down in the Hampton Roads area.


I would like to provide you an update in several areas. I know several
of you have expressed interest in one or more of these areas during
the course of the morning, so I'll try to be as comprehensive as I
can.


The status of the injured, first:



A total of 33 of the injured, as you know, were at the Landstuhl
Regional Medical Center in Germany. A total of -- (to staff) -- how
many of those now have been moved to Norfolk today, to the Portsmouth
Naval Hospital?


Staff: All but the two --



Quigley: Two. Two, I believe, yes. All but two of the six that had
stayed behind, that were the most seriously injured, are now en route
to the Portsmouth Naval Hospital in the Hampton Roads area of
Virginia. The other two's medical condition still precludes safely
transporting them, although the intention is to move them forward as
soon as they are medically stable. And that is just good medicine in
order to do that.


A total of six sets of remains have been found on board the Cole
during the course of today. We are working to identify the remains and
to contact the next of kin of those individuals, and that notification
and identification process continues as we speak.


Q: The Navy was saying seven.



Quigley: There was confusion earlier in the day -- six, seven. The
correct number is indeed six.


Q: And were these among the reported missing, or were two of these
among the reported dead?


Quigley: I don't have clarity on that, Mik, I'm sorry.



The ship itself remains stable. She's providing her own electrical
power. As we have discussed, I think, in the last couple of days,
there are other ships in Aden as well: guided missile frigate Hawes,
the guided missile destroyer Donald Cook are both there. Two of the
three amphibious ships from the amphibious ready group in the region
have arrived over the course of the day -- the Anchorage and the
Duluth. The USS Tarawa should arrive tomorrow. By the time we get in
tomorrow morning, she will have arrived. And the tug Catawba is also
due to arrive tomorrow, and that will bring the total to seven ships
in the area of Aden.


The Navy signed a contract yesterday with the Norwegian owners of the
heavy-lift ship Blue Marlin. This vessel, I think you all have seen
considerable discussion on her capabilities. She is currently in port
in Dubai and is scheduled to leave on Thursday headed for Aden. That
will be about a four- or five-day transit to get to Aden, and
approximately another six or seven days to prepare the Cole for
loading onto the Blue Marlin and then start her trip onward from
there.


No final decision yet as to exactly where Cole will be taken. We're
still doing the evaluation of the damage to the vessel and where
repairs can best be effected.


Q: How much was the contract?



Quigley: About four and a half million dollars. You need to be very
precise with your calculations of where you place the supporting
structures, the keel blocks and the like, as you prepare to place the
Cole on board the Blue Marlin. You've got to make sure that you do
your naval architecture computations quite precisely, to make sure
that you certainly do no further damage to the vessel and she is
adequately supported as she is lifted out of the water onto the Blue
Marlin, and head on from there.


I think that kind of hits the high points of updates that have been of
interest to several of you during the course of the morning, and with
that, I'll take your questions.


Bob?



Q: Craig, the Yemeni government says that they have recovered some
bomb-making equipment or materials. Can you shed any light on what the
nature of that material is and the suspects who have been --


Quigley: No, I can't. I've seen the reports, Bob. I've seen the
initial report and, I think, a couple of updates, but so far I can't
move that further along for you. I'm sorry.


Q: Have they shared any of that information with anybody from the U.S.
government?


Quigley: I don't believe it's been shared with the Department of
Defense. I can't vouch for any other elements of the government.


Tom?



Q: Have investigators been allowed on the ship yet, or if they have
not, when will they go aboard the ship?


Quigley: I believe that there have been a variety of people that are
essential to the conduct of the investigation, as well as the
engineering analysis; certainly medical personnel and others that have
come and gone from Cole.


Yes, Toby?



Q: Is there any indication at all yet on who is responsible for the
bombing?


Quigley: Let me use that perfectly understandable, honest question as
an opportunity to say something clearly to you all. The Department of
Defense is not in charge of the investigation ongoing into the attack
on the Cole. The FBI has the lead. Are we cooperating? You bet we are.
Formally through the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, all --
literally all of the sailors on board the ship, the Department of
State, certainly the embassy -- Ambassador Bodine right there has been
very active in a leadership role in this. This is very much a team
effort, if you will, of several different elements of the United
States government. But I cannot address and will not address in the
days and weeks ahead the progress or findings of any elements of the
investigation. I know those are perfectly honest, legitimate questions
that you have in that regard. But I can't do that.


By the same token, there will be questions, again, that you will ask
in the days to come that we will probably be slower than normal in
responding to your questions. We will be very cautious. We will err on
the side of being overly conservative in the days ahead to make sure
that we don't inadvertently provide information to you all that would
somehow be detrimental to the conduct of the investigation being done.
Will that slow the process down on the provision of information to you
and through you to your readers and listeners and viewers? Yes, it
will. That is certainly the -- not the intent is to obscure or to slow
the process down any more than we have to. But were we to
inadvertently disclose some information that might prove to be a very
important element of the investigation, that would be a terrible
outcome. And we are all pulling towards the same goal, and that's
trying to find out what happened; if we can possibly do so, hold the
parties accountable that perpetrated this act. But we need to be
cautious in the days ahead. So I just want to say that clearly from
the podium.


Q: When you say "to hold the parties accountable," does that mean some
sort of military action, as happened in 1998 with the cruise missiles?


Quigley: I wouldn't try to predict that today. But as the president
has said, as Secretary Cohen has said, that we would hold the parties
accountable, and I think I'll just leave it at that.


John?



Q: Can you lay out the deployment of these additional ships, sort of
the personnel involved and why is it necessary to bring so many
additional ships and military personnel to bear on a port city that's
already overwhelmed with Americans?


Quigley: Sure. In no particular order, the Catawba is a tug, and she
would be used in the days ahead to help position the Cole on board the
Blue Marlin when she arrives in the vicinity of Aden.


The closest two ships to the scene and those vessels that are now most
familiar to the crew of Cole and to other officials that are involved
in the process were indeed the frigate Hawes and the destroyer Donald
Cook. For -- and so they have remained as a -- the first on the scene
and have been more actively involved for a longer period of time than
any of the other vessels.


Q: What do you gain by the --



Quigley: The three vessels of the amphibious unit, amphibious
readiness group that -- two today and the third tomorrow -- provide a
variety -- these are very large ships -- very capable medical
facilities, large capability to provide food, laundry services, extra
bunks, for not only the military personnel but some of the other U.S.
government personnel to possibly move ashore and -- or move afloat
onto these vessels and reduce the American footprint ashore and move
some of the people involved in the salvage, in the investigation and
what have you on to one or more of these very large amphibious ships.


They also have excellent communications capabilities, and helicopters
on each and every one of them that are designed to carry large amounts
of people or cargo. So they bring a variety of capabilities to the
equation that we are very confident that we'll find useful --


Q: Do you feel that the Americans on the shore are at risk? Is that
what you're implying?


Quigley: This is the site of a terrible attack that happened just a
few days ago. We have moved both U.S. security personnel in over the
past several days and are getting wonderful cooperation from the
government of Yemen as well.


And yet I certainly think that it would be better to err on the side
of caution in this case. And it's felt that by moving some of the
footprint of the various American investigators and salvage folks and
what have you from hotels and other facilities ashore onto those naval
vessels, that we improve our security posture.


Q: You think that sending several thousand Marines to a small city
like this sends the right signal?


Quigley: Well, the Marines that are embarked on the three ships of the
amphibious ready group are a pretty self-contained group. They have --
All their facilities that normally support them afloat will still
remain in place. There is excess capacity built into an amphibious
ready group by design, so that you could handle casualties, medical
emergencies, evacuations of embassies overseas, and whatnot. So as any
amphibious ready group would deploy from the United States to
overseas, there is excess capacity built into that, by design.


We hope to capitalize on that in the days and weeks to come for those
American personnel that find themselves in Aden.


Dale?



Q: It sounds like you're going to turn some of these ships into
floating barracks for some of the folks that have flown in to assist
in the investigation. Can you tell us roughly how many people you
expect to be taking care of aboard?


Quigley: We don't have that worked out yet. Some will be in a -- the
function that an individual or a group of individuals is carrying out
there in Aden can be performed just as well from one of the amphibious
vessels as ashore. In other skill sets, that certainly won't be the
case, so we've still got to sort that out as to specifically which
individuals might be moving on board one of the vessels and which will
be staying ashore.


Q: I wanted to get back to the investigators aboard the ship. Are they
working side-by-side with those trying to keep the ship afloat and
those searching for the bodies, or will you wait until that work is
done and then have the investigators go back and do a more thorough
job?


Quigley: Well, I don't think it's quite literally side-by-side, but, I
mean, the individuals that are conducting the investigation, gathering
evidence and what have you, you're working very closely and very
hand-in-glove. And as you know, we've got a very concerted effort
ongoing to recover the remains of the sailors that are still missing,
and to do that requires quite a bit of cutting and removal of debris
and moving it aside. We're being very cautious before any such moves
are done to make sure that the investigators -- we're not surprising
the investigators, and perhaps inadvertently moving something or
altering something's position in a way that would have an adverse
impact on the investigation.


So it's a cautious approach, trying to accomplish both things as
quickly as we can.


Q: How many Marines were on the --



Q: Craig, are there any plans to put any of the Marines on shore? Or
has permission been sought for them, perhaps, to use their helicopters
to deploy -- perhaps in hot pursuit of suspected bombers in the
countryside in Yemen?


Quigley: Well, you have two groups of Marines that are already on the
shore, and that's the two Marine FAST [Fleet Antiterrorism Security
Team] platoons. But if you're referring to the Marines of the Marine
Expeditionary Unit, to the MEU, that are coming with the amphibious
ready group, I don't think there's -- in any substantial numbers
there's any intention to move them ashore. No.


Jamie?



Q: As long as you're providing clarity, can you just clarify what
"Operation Determined Response" refers to? What comes under that
operation? What's the definition for that?


Quigley: The provision of security to the -- I mean, the commander of
the Joint Task Force that's been assigned, answering both to the
American ambassador there as well as to the commander-in-chief of the
U.S. Central Command, that person's charter is to provide security for
the U.S. personnel that are there, and to coordinate the efforts of
the response: the access, the divers, the salvage people; the various
talents that are being brought to bear to help repair and stabilize
the ship itself, recover remains --


Q: Will all of these seven ships come under Operation Determined
Response?


Quigley: Yes.



Q: Those seven ships?



Quigley: Yes.



Q: But those -- what about any --



Quigley: At least for the time being. At least for the time being.



Q: What about any aspect of the criminal investigation or the pursuit
of the -- whoever were the perpetrators of this; is that part of
Operation Determined Response as well?


Quigley: No, the investigation is a separate element. I mean, that's
certainly an element that we're supporting. But -- and if there's an
issue of coordination or something, I'm sure that the lead FBI
investigators would not hesitate to approach Admiral Fitzgerald and
try to work it out.


But this is very much an interagency process that's going on there.
And the key to success is communication -- talking amongst yourselves
to resolve ambiguities and provide clarity as to who can do what and
with whom, and how you go about doing it.


Mik?



Q: What can you tell us about the explosive device that was used to
attack the Cole?


Quigley: Nothing yet, I'm afraid.



Q: Nothing?



Quigley: No.



Q: Can you -- can you --



Quigley: Pam?



Q: Can you go through the number of Marines on each of the ships? And
is it 100 in two FAST platoons, or is it 50 in Aden?


Quigley: There are a total of 101 Marines in the two FAST platoons,
approximately 50 each.


Q: Okay.



Quigley: And you are looking at 2,100 Marines total, split among the
three amphibious ships. But I don't know the breakout by ship. We can
get that for you.


Q: That's okay. And how many of the dead have been recovered? It's six
bodies today that haven't been identified, and then was it five that
have been returned?


Quigley: Correct.



Q: So it's a total of 11, six of whom are still unidentified --



Quigley: Correct.



Q: -- leaving six bodies yet to be recovered.



Quigley: Right.



Q: If you can't describe the explosive device, could you describe in
better detail what we can't see beyond that hole in the hull, the kind
of damage that this device wrought?


Quigley: I have not been provided great detail in that regard. A
statement of the obvious, I guess: the blast and the destruction near
the hole is certainly more severe than that further away from the hole
in the port side. That goes into an engineering space; the damage is
extensive in the engineering space. It is certainly less as it moves
out. But you still have extensive damage. That's one of the elements
of work that is still ongoing, is a precise assessment of the damage
to the ship.


As you prepare in the days ahead to lift the Cole on board the Blue
Marlin, you want to make sure that you have supporting pieces both for
her keel as well as the sides in the right places so that you provide
adequate support to a damaged vessel. Every ship as it comes out of
the builders' yards has a very precise docking plan, and with complete
knowledge in hand of where you place your support members as you would
go into a dry dock, let's say, for an overhaul, or a painting of the
hull, or something like that. You have changed the physical
characteristics of the distribution of weight on board the Cole by the
damage that she has suffered. So you really need to be precise here as
to where should I change the placement of those support structures so
that I can provide good support for the hull as she comes out of the
water.


Q: So is the damage so extensive that the Cole could actually break in
half?


Quigley: I don't have that understanding, Mick, no. But you could make
it worse if you don't support it properly and let the damaged section
receive inadequate support. It's very possible that that section right
there might need some additional support, or certainly the placement
of support pieces in different locations other -- different from an
intact vessel of that same class.


So these are the sorts of details that the engineering assessment team
from Naval Sea Systems Command, Norfolk Naval Shipyard are there to
provide as well.


Q: Admiral, as you look toward the --



Quigley: Jimmy, I'm sorry, hold that thought.



Steve?



Pietropaoli: The assessment so far is that there's no structural
impediment to lifting it. You're right, they have to be careful in how
you place the blocks, in any case, even with a perfectly intact ship.
But with respect to the damage now, there's no structural impediment
to using the Blue Marlin.


Q: The keel clear? The keel is fine?



Quigley: Yes.



Yes. Go ahead.



Q: As you look toward the future, what practical steps can be taken to
increase security for U.S. warships that are refueling in foreign
ports? Are there any practical steps that can be -- what can be done
to increase security?


Quigley: I think the first step needs to be to find out in detail what
circumstances we had in place here. If you take a look at other
attacks on American forces in the past, each time that we have
reviewed the procedures in place we learn something. And we moved out
as quickly and intelligently as we could, I think, to try to build
upon those lessons learned to try to make it better for the future. So
I think this needs to be a two-step process, in answer to your
question: first we find out what happened, and then we take a hard
look at what we might do, knowing that, to change procedures in the
future.


Q: Well, what kinds of procedures could you -- could possibly be
instituted that would increase security? What kinds of things are you
talking about?


Quigley: But I think you need to do it in the order that I described,
Jamie. I can't predict what the investigation will find. So we can't
be kind of going -- charging ahead without knowing where that will
take us.


Q: But you can predict that the investigation will find that a small
boat exploded next to the USS Cole and severely damaged it, took a lot
of lives, and so -- I mean, for instance, could you put a security
perimeter around a ship with smaller boats, or something like that?
I'm just --


Quigley: Well, we could hypothesize many possible answers to your
question, but I just don't think that's the right way to go. I think
you need to do this in a sequential process, as I've described. So I
don't think I can give you a good answer today.


Q: Let me try this one more time by turning it around, then I'll drop
the subject, which is, are there no good options for increasing
security for ships? Is this simply a risk that has to be accepted?


Quigley: I would never say that there's nothing you can do. But I'd
say that making intelligent choices as to any changes that you might
choose to put in place needs to wait for what we have learned from the
investigation.


Dale?



Q: Admiral Clark said Sunday that there was a harbor pilot on the
bridge of the Cole, a Yemeni officer, helping to steer the ship to its
mooring. Was he taken into custody after this occurred? Is he -- do
you know where he is at this point?


Quigley: No, I don't.



Q: And had the husbanding agent come aboard, or anybody representing
him?


Quigley: Sir, I don't have either of the answers to those questions. I
know there was indeed a harbor pilot aboard, as there typically is
when naval vessels will enter foreign ports. But I don't know the
answers to your questions, Dale.


Yes, sir?



Q: A State Department spokesman this morning told me about an
increasingly -- it look likes -- increasingly like a terrorist act.
Does it mean that nearly a week after, there is a slight doubt that it
is not a terrorist act?


Quigley: Well, I think you're always going to have a slight doubt. I
mean, it's that -- always that temptation to jump to a conclusion.
Many have said over the past few days that we have many reasons to
suspect that this was indeed a terrorist act, and no good ones that
come up as to why we would not call it as such. But it's just a
reluctance, I think, in order to put the cart before the horse. This
is a very obvious question; you'd think it would have a quick and
obvious answer. I just would have to stay with all signs point to
that, but, you know, any other contributing factors, we just don't
know yet. That's another reason to do a thorough investigation.


Q: A follow-up. Can you totally exclude an accident?



Quigley: I don't think there's any evidence, physical evidence that we
have seen so far, that would support an accident.


Chris?



Q: Mik asked about the explosive itself. Has there been no
determination yet -- I don't know, you'd swabbed the blast area,
determined whether it's C-4 or some other form of explosive? Has no
determination been made as to what type of explosive was used?


Quigley: Probably a great question to ask the FBI.



Q: You have no awareness of whether they've made a determination in
this area?


Quigley: I need to stick with what I said in the beginning. The FBI is
and will remain in the lead on the investigation part, and I would
defer to them. Whether they choose to piecemeal answers to their
findings, it's their call.


Q: And no determination as to the size of the explosive charge that
was used, if you don't know what type of explosive it is?


Quigley: No.



Q: And back to Jamie's question for a moment. You have these other
ships coming into Aden now. Have additional or different security
procedures been adopted by those ships, given what has just happened
here? Are they providing for a perimeter?


Quigley: Yeah, perfectly --



Q: Are they investigating small boats before they approach the ships?
Has any additional measure been taken to protect those ships?


Quigley: Now let me start with the last question first, and I'd say
yes. The tragedy that befell the Cole last week is something that --
we certainly don't want to be letting our guard down now to put any
other vessels or individuals at any more risk than they would normally
be as they arrive in that area to assist in the repair and recovery of
the Cole.


We have taken a very hard look -- State Department, FBI, Navy, U.S.
Central Command -- at the security procedures in place, made
adjustments where we felt it was appropriate. I hope you'll understand
that I'm not going to be real forthcoming on what some of those
adjustments might be. But we're pretty confident that we have the
correct security procedures in place for the forces that we have in
the vicinity of Aden to support recovery efforts for Cole.


Q: And have those measures also been taken for ships throughout the
region?


Quigley: Certainly in the area of responsibility of Central Command,
yes.


Q: All right. So --



Q: Does that involve -- are the U.S. forces providing harbor security
in the area where the ships are?


Quigley: You've got the two FAST platoons, whose focus, full-time
focus, is security. The crew -- crew members of every ship are very
aware and are on a -- very much on their toes.


Q: Do the FAST platoons have boats?



Quigley: I don't know if they brought their own. They certainly have
access to vessels there. I don't know if they brought their own,
though, Jamie.


Q: Would it be safe to say that it would be difficult to get close to
an American ship in a small boat at this point?


Quigley: Yes, sir. That would be an accurate way to put it.



Pam?



Q: Have you all had any intelligence intercepts in the last five days
suggesting that there continues to be danger? Have there been any
threats made or anything gathered from HUMINT? And then could you also
tell me how dangerous is the work that the folks are doing in
recovery? Are they -- is the -- it keeps getting characterized on
television as "dangerous," but how dangerous is it? Is the boat in any
--


Quigley: Let me take the first one first. Without providing a specific
answer, Pam, due to security classifications on that issue, we're
always very much aware of any general or specific threats that are
communicated to Americans around the world, whether they be DoD
personnel or travelers abroad. You evaluate each and every one that
you receive for its credibility, for its specificity -- or lack of it
-- and you take the appropriate action from there. That's just a
procedure that is followed around the world by both DoD and Department
of State, as well.


Now, on the recovery and the salvage and the diving operations that
are going on, yes, this is dangerous work. Anybody that has been even
a sport scuba diver over the years has a good understanding of its
inherently dangerous work. When you're working around a damaged ship
with the integrity of some of the parts that you're trying to work
your way through in order to find remains and whatnot, it just adds a
level of difficulty and an inherent sense of danger to all that.


Q: So the diving --



Quigley: But these divers are very well trained. They're very much
aware of their surroundings. It's something that they work very hard
to be quite good at.


Q: They're going in the flooded compartments under -- they're not just
inspecting the outside; they're actually going into the damaged area?


Quigley: Correct. Both.



Q: Where are the divers from --



Quigley: I don't know off the top of my head.



Staff: You can get the -- they've got the MDSU designation.



Quigley: Yeah. Let me -- it's a Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit, and it
has a number attached to that. I don't know which one it is. [The
divers are assigned to MDSU 2, Explosive Ordnance Disposal [EOD]
Mobile Diving Unit 6 Detachment 8, and EOD Mobile Diving Unit 8
Detachment Bahrain.]


Tom?



Q: Getting back to security and lessons learned, does the Pentagon
anticipate setting up any sort of commission or separate
investigation, similar to Khobar Towers, after this criminal
investigation is done, or is that too early to --


Quigley: Yeah. Secretary Cohen has not come to that decision yet. I
don't have anything for you on that today. Should he do so, I mean, we
would certainly announce that when the day comes.


Pat?



Q: Has there been any change in security arrangements at U.S. ports
where Navy ships are tied up?


Quigley: Hampton Roads, San Diego, something like that?



Q: San Diego --



Quigley: You know, the entire Navy, the entire Department of Defense
is very much aware of what happened to Cole. I think it's safe to say
that everybody is putting a little bit more emphasis on security, no
matter where you might be found; even in your home port or any
overseas location.


Pam?



Q: The Air Force general that was in charge of Dhahran saw his career
end as a result of that attack. Has anything come up that would
indicate the skipper of the Cole doesn't need to worry about his
career?


Quigley: Nothing I have seen yet. I think the commanding officer of
the Cole has done a magnificent job in continuing to lead his crew and
coordinate the efforts there, at the center of an incredible amount of
attention and focus, as it should be. But I think he's done a
magnificent job so far in leading his crew.


Q: There was one report that he -- I forget the exact term they used
-- "locked and dogged" some of the hatches below -- the commander did
this. As a result, they think the damage to the Cole was less than
would have happened had he not taken that action. Do you know anything
about --


Quigley: I don't know the specific -- I had not heard that description
as you describe it, although it is typical. I mean, you have
water-tight classifications of hatches, doors -- any sort of a
water-tight or fume-tight boundary on a ship. As a ship comes and goes
in different conditions and different locations, you can either set or
relax a particular water-tight condition that would be in place for
any given evolution. But I have not heard a description as you
describe it.


Q: Can you take that, please? Can you look into that?



Quigley: I think that's going to be one of those things that they're
going to try to ascertain what was the condition of all of the various
hatches and doors, and what not, to try to determine the blast
pattern. And I don't think I'll be able to get that detail.


Q: Is that standard operation for a ship putting in for refueling?



Quigley: I'm sorry?



Q: Is that standard operating procedure for a ship putting in for
refueling to lock-down and close all those hatches?


Quigley: Yes. You would see an increased level of water-tight security
put in place whenever you enter a port, period.


Jamie?



Q: Among the initial reports was one that this small craft assisted
the USS Cole in attaching the mooring line to a buoy. Is there any
reason now to think that -- is there any less confidence in that
account at this point, after all the people on the ship have been
interviewed?


Quigley: Another great question to ask the FBI. I'm sorry, I can't
provide that.


Q: The two sailors in Germany, what's their condition? Serious?
Critical? Do you know?


Quigley: Well, the doctors there are evaluating their condition on a
daily basis. And they understand that everyone is eager to have them
home, but they need to --


Q: What is their condition? Serious? Critical? Stable?



Quigley: I don't know.



Pietropaoli: -- medically stable, it's not life-threatening. But
they're just -- it's not appropriate to travel.


Quigley: Yeah, unwise to travel. But they are stable, yeah.



Q: Housekeeping. Tomorrow -- is there a press plane going down with
Cohen?


Quigley: I don't know yet. I don't think it will be a separate press
plane. There may be some seats on one of the aircraft. Please, if any
of you do wish to go, would you see either Brian Whitman or Captain
Tim Taylor and let them know your desires. We'll try to accommodate,
but I don't have that answer yet.


Yes, sir.



Q: Can I venture a different topic question?



Quigley: Sure.



Q: Because of the incident last Thursday, we never really got a more
detailed debrief on the conversation that the secretary had with a
North Korean -- besides that initial readout that evening. Do you have
any more you can give us on exactly what they discussed and if they
made any progress in any of the areas of -- nonproliferation, for
example?


Quigley: Yeah. Let me take that, and I'll do what we can, and then
post it by close of business today. [The joint communique resulting
from the visit is available on line at
http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/001012_usdprk_jointcom.html.]


Q: Thank you.



Quigley: Thank you all.