I ran. Yeah, I wanted to ask you, in light of the I-E-A report, what you think needs to happen now in terms of sanctions with Iran. I think one of the first things that we need to do before we get to sanctions is we need to make sure we're clear our message that our Iran is not just an Israeli problem or US problem, it's a world problem and a nuclear Iran is just not acceptable to the world. We need to state that very clearly versus the same thing. The second thing that I think is important that we do is after stating that with clarity, we need to make sure that we have sanctions and speak with equal clarity. That is sanctions that are going to actually work and stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. They may involve the refining of their petroleum products or perhaps are sell the petroleum problems, maybe with their banking systems, but sanctions that are going to have enough teeth in them to make sure that this doesn't happen to the world. And the third thing is I think it's important we not take any options off the table. Our Iran needs to have a clear message from the world that a nuclear Iran is not acceptable to the world community. Okay, if you could say your position on the US decision to cut UNESCO funding after the UNESCO vote to accept Palestine as a state, and in general, what do you think of continued US funding of UN? Well, I think most people in the United States Congress were supportive of the decision to cut funding to the United Nations once they supported a lateral Palestinian state. I think the second thing that you'll find is that many people in Congress actually would support a reduction of funding to the UN until we have a full accounting of one where those dollars are going and secondly what they're being utilized for. I think President Obama's use of the return to the 1967 lines for Israel was difficult in several respects. I think the first and most important thing is that we need to be very, very clear on our position in terms of the United States position of the UN Israel. And that was a very confusing statement because the President stated one thing in several weeks came back and tried to clarify as a position. So first of all, just from a clarity point of view, it was wrong. But secondly, from a substance point of view, it was absolutely wrong. I don't see how Israel can possibly return to the 67 lines and hope to defend this country and have the security that they need. And I think it would be absolutely wrong for the United States to try to dictate that to the Israeli government or to this country as a whole. Okay, do you think that the US should be pushing Israel to freeze settlement construction? I don't think the US should be dictating to the Israeli government what it should be doing in terms of cities, villages, communities that it has throughout its own landscape. I think it's very important when you actually go and visit those areas you find out that settlement is even a misnomer. We're talking about cities, towns, families, communities. And I think it's important that we let those cities and communities work out some of their problems themselves without having to dictate it from another country somewhere in another part of the world. Would you support moving the US embassy to Jerusalem? First of all, I think that's a decision that should be made by the Israeli people and the Israeli government. Nobody in the United States would think that any other country in the world should tell us where we should put our capital. I don't think that we should tell the people of Israel where they should put their capital. But once the people of Israel have decided, Jerusalem should be their capital. I think it's important that our embassy should be in their capital and I would support that move.