Look at Iraq; look at Afghanistan, where at great personal physical risk people have gone to the polls and have rejected the appeal from Bin Laden and his allies to stay at home.

Muslim organisations tend to have a low level of organisation. The communities in Europe are quite diverse.

You can't get closer to the heart of national sovereignty than national security and intelligence services.

Europe has a long and tragic history of mostly domestic terrorism.

Ultimately, freedom and democracy are stronger than fear and tyranny.

Terrorists have failed in what is arguably al Qaida's most important objective - to trigger revolutions.

The European Borders Agency in Warsaw has been created to help border forces in Europe cooperate more.

I remain optimistic. What we've seen in Europe and the rest of the world is that freedom has a much stronger attraction than radical fundamentalism.

The violent radicals do not legitimately represent the overwhelming majority of the world's Muslims.

If you exchange information internationally, you must strengthen data protection. Those are two sides of the same coin.

Police forces collect information to be used in a public court to get people convicted. Security services gather information that does not necessarily lead to people being prosecuted and in many cases needs to remain confidential.

If information ends up in the wrong hands, the lives of people very often are immediately at risk.

Terrorists always have the advantage of surprise.

The key to tackling Islamist fundamentalism and terrorism from the Islamist community is in the hands of moderate Muslims.

Terrorists have failed to trigger mass conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims in Europe. We should draw strength from that fact.

In the fight against terrorism, national agencies keep full control over their police forces, security and intelligence agencies and judicial authorities.

If you combat an international phenomenon, it is indispensable to share information internationally.

There are no automatic links between poverty and terrorism. Among millions of poor people in the world, only a few turn to terrorism.

We have an integrated picture of the threat from outside and from within that is provided not only to our foreign ministers but also to our justice and interior ministers.

We remain vulnerable. There is no such thing as 100 percent security against terrorism.

The central role in the fight against terrorism is with national authorities.

There is a series of sectors which could be severely disrupted by terrorist attacks, particularly if they were to happen in several member states simultaneously.

I have never come across a technology that doesn't change. This is inevitable. You have to adapt your systems as technology develops.

The majority of the world's Muslims do not believe that terrorism is a legitimate strategy or that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

In intelligence work, there are limits to the amount of information one can share. Confidentiality is essential.

We are familiar with terrorism. But indiscriminate, cross-border, religiously motivated terrorism is new.

In situations of military conflict, civil strife, lawlessness, bad governance, and human rights violations, terrorists find it easier to hide, train and prepare their attacks.

We still lack a global definition of terrorism.

Our strategy should be to strengthen the hand of moderate Muslims.

The idea is to have global standards. There is so much travel that if you just had a regional standard, it would probably ultimately have to be changed.

We're still stymied by the old stand-off between those who wish to fight terrorism and resistance fighters.

Indiscriminate attacks on civilians ought, under all circumstances, to be illegal in war as in peacetime.

Look at Iraq; look at Afghanistan, where at great personal physical risk people have gone to the polls and have rejected the appeal from Bin Laden and his allies to stay at home.

It's important that we work very closely with moderate Muslim forces locally, nationally and internationally.

Several million people inside and outside Afghanistan are destitute and desperately in need of help.

We ought to recognize that we have an offensive responsibility to take the war to the terrorists where they are. That responsibility has waned in the last year as military and intelligence resources were withdrawn from Afghanistan and Pakistan to be used in Iraq.

We don't consider the battle has ended in Afghanistan... The battle has begun and its fires are picking up. These fires will reach the White House, because it is the center of injustice and tyranny.

There is a difference between a military mission and the aspiration for the long-term plans for the country. What we want is a stable enough Afghanistan, able to look after its own security so we can leave without the fear of it imploding... But let's be clear - it's not going to be perfect.

However, it does seem now that the international community, more importantly the powers that have influence, and, even more importantly, Afghanistan's neighbors realize that it is high time that they work together, and not against one another.

In Afghanistan, this is the problem, because everybody holds a piece of that mirror, and they all look at it and claim that they hold the entire truth.

A fly cannot go in unless it stops somewhere; therefore weapons, fuel, food, money will not go to Afghanistan unless the neighbors of Afghanistan are working, are cooperating, either being themselves the origin or the transit.

Certainly the existence of these huge nuclear force was important for the ultimate confrontation, let's say, over western Europe. You just can't use them to deal with a situation like Afghanistan.

Last year I traveled to the Middle East to visit with troops in Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

I'm also working with Mrs. Bush on some education projects in Afghanistan, so I get to see her a great deal.

I suggested that we had experience in helping other countries build their military forces, and we would be willing and happy to do the same for Afghanistan, together with the United States.

We haven't been out in many of these countries helping them build infrastructure. How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of that, rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go to Afghanistan?

In fact, if you look upon the situation today, there is great division in the world and we have failed to capitalize on that unity to finish the job in Afghanistan and against al Qaeda.

Canada is preparing to play a major role in the continued stability and security of Afghanistan through ISAF.

The men and women of Afghanistan are building a nation that is free, and proud, and fighting terror - and America is honored to be their friend.