what to put in, and it makes a difference to the high school students. there is an educator, sharon egan, and we do not have enough great educators and education philosophers, and she is one of them. education was good enough for plato, for russo, for montesquieu, for pain. and the point is made that elementary kids are very different, middle school kids from high school. so the way we present history needs to be different. i have written mostly for elementary and middle school kids. a think you need a solid foundation. if your two--- if you are excessively negative, you turn

out skeptics without excessive belief. .

some people think that children are too young to know, but in this book the children were smuggled out under horrible conditions and put back together, they were 10 years old. they were drawing butterflies on the wall to calm the nerves of the three, four, and 5 year olds. children can handle it. they know what is going on even though we think we have to protect them. and they can learn to help protect the problems. psychological stress comes from why is anyone talking about these problems in a child? hosguest: that is certainly tru.

i do not spare -- i talk about the problems and the poor choices that have been made, but overall i believe that we have a remarkable country and we are able to fix our problems and we have this great constitution. we have a great deal to be proud of. we have a lot of things to be ashamed of and we have to balance that. host: we have used the books for the past two years as home schoolers. it makes history enjoyable and engaging for our children. if you would also be surprised that as an adult and enriched my understanding of u.s. history so much i am reading through the u.s. constitution course. thank you, dennis allen. guest: that is nice. i hear from a lot of parents they are learning history from their children.

guehost: what about the use of the books for home schoolers? guest: my books are better than anything else there. that is not bragging, because the other things are pretty bad. host: the next call is from john and oregon. caller: i was tempted to call in on the educator's line, but i was asking -- i was not sure if home schoolers qualified as genuine educators. i find the history books, as i assist home schoolers in their science curriculum, i have noticed the u.s. to raise in their houses and they do find it carry -- very useful.

the home schoolers that i have been acquainted with over the years are much better leaders than the children in the public schools that i have encountered. one of the things or -- @ thank you for your series on the u.s. history, and thank you for beginning a series on science. a couple of recent events, president obama on the front lawn of the white house held a party and talk about the science and technology in mathematics being important for our students. later there was another event held discussing robotics at the eisenhower were building. president obama talking about stem education. the secretary of education also. the reason that i called -- what

i'd do is supplement the various home schoolers that i have encountered through the years and direct them to the resources of nasa, and the events that are being aired on nasa television at various times, out whether it is a space mission or a press conference or something like that. i have found that nasa television is the best-kept secret on cable-tv. googler lahood -- if you google nasa and comcast, you will find there is no major cable company that provides of nasa television. we did the tv through the community accepts basin. they devote an incredible generous amounts of time airing nassim fasa t.v.

guest: thank you. there is an enormous amount of material out there. a lot of it is superb and science. we also do a lot of hands-on sascience. there is always electricity in the air, and yet something is not working. our science course go down. we are not keeping up with the rest of the world. there is this problem. i think it is because there is no idea base. i think a lot of it is high- class entertainment. even at the time you are doing it, kids may understand it but a month later it is gone because there is no idea base.

what i have tried to do is write books that put experiments in context so that when you are reading about it, that is the time to do the experiments. then you will have a sense of why they were done, and maybe it will stay with you. i was in a classroom in connecticut, rural connecticut, and i said this kind of thing and the teachers said -- she was wonderful. she wanted to be the best teacher in the world and she was so sincere and dedicated, and she told me that she had finally done what she felt was the perfect lesson, she had finally arrived. she did this science thing about the water table. somehow they did a model of the water table. what ever. they approached it from every side. she was so pleased.

one month later there was a standardized tests that the kids were going to take and one of the answers was the water table. so she knew every one of her kids would get that right. not a single child did. we talk about that. she talked to one of her students later and she said, don't you remember my perfect lesson? clearly he did not. a lot of the things are disconnected activities. history education, it is becoming exponential. kids dressed up as colonial people.

that is all fun. and it is more than fun it is meaningful. but it has to be in conjunction with ideas. i am finding with my history books that at they are being must -- that they are being read much less. we're into lesson plans now. teachers duties elaborate lesson plans. a teacher takes a chapter from my book, put it altogether -- they did a great acclaim from their peers because of the wonderful lesson plans. the teacher has learned a lot, the kids do not learn much of anything. i had this conversation this summer with a friend who was a teacher and nevis and have kids are just reading the chapters. this woman is a teacher in a

suburb. her 13-year-old daughter was standing next to her and both of us said your books are in our schools. i said am i right, are you just reading chapters? she said we do not read chapters, we read paragraphs. i do not know what is going on out there. >> the author of funding miss wrights this about your books. of all the text, the one that perpetuates the most untruth about the american revolution, i found all whopping 17 is joy hakim's immensely popular, " a history of us." guest: i wish he would give me

spensome specifics. let me just say that all of the books have been written by experts in the field. every book was read by someone who was an expert in that field. the civil war and reconstruction books work read by a princeton professor. he found a few things that were wrong, and i corrected them. it is very good history. there were experts that read the revolutionary -- host: you had not seen that " kop quote before? guest: no. i would like to know specifically how -- and away, i

do not want to say i am delighted, but that is what history should be. when we are arguing about politics, -- history is the politics of the past and you cannot expect everyone to see if the same. could the -- kid should be aware of that. -- kids should be aware of that. host: the next call is from memphis, tennessee. caller: i am enjoying it you so much. i am thrilled -- there is hope for the future and looking at someone like you and what you are trying to do. i taught for 50 years. i started out with degrees in english and history, and then i talked and every manageable

situation -- public schools, private schools, all levels. i was a substitute teacher in some situations. i raised four children. i am nervous, so excuse me. the point is that after doing all of it, i went back in my 40's. one of the first women to go back to school and then lived in the dorm, and with the permission of my husband went back to take the teacher course is. i did learn from them. why because i have looked down my nose all those years, but i must say that i went to a good teachers college and did learn from the courses. the teacher has problems with her children who could not do the test, you do have to teach

to the test. you cannot just go in and talk all day. the other thing is you can have the best lesson plan in the world, but when you walk in the wordoor, you cannot teach until you have their attention. it may take an hour to get their attention. guest: that is interesting. there are many different ways to teach. if the teacher is good, it works. if there is a buzz and everyone is talking and it is free- spirited, it works. there is no one way to teach. i think we need to be more appreciative of teachers in allowing them to express

themselves and do what works for them. for me, where i see teaching going and some of the past -- s classrooms i have seen are suited-directed. -- some of the best classroom's i have seen our studenare stude- directed. one of the best teachers sent me on writing assignments to look at and cried about the best schools. this was the teacher's union and he knew good schools. one of the schools that i went to -- i came in the night before and i met with some teachers who met once a week in their homes.

then i spent a day in this public school, and i never saw a teacher standing in the class lecturing. it was amazing. this school was totally student- run. teachers were pretty much sitting at their desks. i spent a lot of time in the fourth grade. the kids went right to their desks. they had reading, writing assignment they did first. as they are sitting there busy with their work, they seem to know -- they went up to the teacher. each one had not one-on-one sessions with the teacher during the week. after the reading was over they

did arithmetic. the teacher had divided the classroom into groups. the kids work together. they even had behavior monitors. the kids ran the classroom. that is great. it works. host: the next call comes from north carolina. please go ahead. caller: i am very interested in responding to comments about the quality of teachers. this is something that has come to my attention personally. i do not have anyone in school anymore. my children are grown. i do come in contact with students who are in teacher- training institutions in my town. i have learned a little bit

about their curriculum recently, and i have to tell you that it is truly distressing. i had a minor in history, but my field was in his english. in the field of english i have tried to pay attention recently to what these people are supposedly learning. i can tell you that there is -- the content is absolutely bad. they are going to be going out and teaching your subjects. i know that english is not of your textbook fields, but please let me tell you what these people who are training as teachers have to take to satisfy their english literature requirement. one semester. this is currently the curriculum. stephen king's "the shining'

"the house next door." "to novellus" "the haunting of hell house." this is the english requirement. if these people are having this as their english requirement, saying " they are having as far as the rest of it. they are going to go out and teach your subjects. >>guest: we do have some very gd education schools. i just saw that harvard is instituting a new program on teaching leadership. there are very good people who go into these programs. most of them are disappointed and what they are getting.

i have written books that attempts to teach the teacher as well as the student. that is about all i can do. i really nice young history teacher came to visit me and she was going to use my book and she said i am so scared, i do not know any u.s. history. i said calm down, learn with their kids. if you can create learning environments with these teachers that are under educated, where they can convey excitement, the material is out there. the internet is the most democratic revolutionary saying. a used to be that if you really want to be educated you had to go to corrine bridge -- cambridge. now you can be on a mountain top somewhere and have access to

information. it is up to individuals. we have too many administrators. we're loaded with administrators. we need to get rid of a lot of them. there are good ones, but there are also a lot that are not. host: house should teachers introduce stimulating materials while still meeting the state requirement for standardized testing? guest: the standardized testing is a problem. teachers do not need to do what they are doing. a lot of it is because they're under pressure from administrators. i have a friend who is a teacher in california. she tells me that two weeks before the test they start teaching to the test. the rest of the year he does good teaching. there is there reason to the teach to the test all year.

they do not teach before and they do not teach after, and they're just teaching to this test. it is bizarre. if you spend the whole year teaching for the test, you have mindless kids and they do poorly. if you teach well, and good teachers -- the kids do well on the test. host: what would be your answer, what are the three most important things to u.s. history? guest: i have not been asked. for me it is the ideas in histories. my favorite document is the virginia statute for religious freedom. it was written by thomas jefferson. that is the most unique

contribution in american history economy to political theory. it was the hardest -- jefferson and madison -- jefferson wrote it but madison got it through the general assembly. patrick henry fraught -- fought against it. george washington was on defense. he was later to find out -- finally it got past. they were asking the members to open their doors to a very dangerous methodist and baptists. they were really scary. it took nine years to get the

bill passed. madison helped along by giving patrick henry to take it upstairs to the governorship. finally it passed with allowing people to believe. amazingly virginia was no more or less and moral than had been before. washington became a big fan of the statute. -- amazingly virginia was no more or less imoral than it had been before. we have never had a religious war in this country, in contrast to places all over the globe. wheat respect each other's religion. h-- we respect each other's religion. host: is it tough to write about religion and history?

guest: a lot of books that away from it. most people have a lease systems, and that is part of our history. i think it should be in there. >host: jacksonville, florida. you are on the line. caller: my question is, will you ever write of black history book? why is it not being taught in school? why is it we pick and choose when to insert african americans? we have come here and been here -- your history always starts with the fact that we were slaves. i am just curious why we're not teaching enough about black americans and where they come from? host: besides pre-slavery days,

what else sees think is important to teach about african-american history? caller: where we come from. attributes of this country. the fact that so many people were upset because they did not want an african-american president to speak to the students. we have come a long way, but in the same way we have not because that is shown in our attitudes towards an american predict african-american president. -- it is shown in our attitudes towards an african-american president. guest: i would like you to read my books. one of the nicest things that happen to me -- i went to the city where they are using the books and i met a teacher who was african-american, and she looked at me and she said you could not have written these books, and i said, yes, i did.

she said she was sure that i was african american. the books are filled with african american history. i feel strongly about this. african american history does not belong just to you, it belongs to me, too. it belongs to all of us. that is a great thing about our country. we are doing something that is so unusual, taking people from all over and making them american. you have all reasons to be angry about the way that african americans were treated in the past, but i tried very hard to be fair about that. go to the library and read five books. -- and read my books. host: this is from chapter 23 of

your book. next call is patrick in west virginia. please go ahead. caller: i would like to say thank you for having me. the biggest problems that i have -- i am an educator, and i do teach the fourth grade. the biggest problems that i have is we are under a system right now that we have to ride a labyrinth lessowrite it laborat. another thing, you brought up the testing, the mandatory

testing. all of the jobs right now hang in the balance of upon how well our students do in the testing. it is not fair to us as educators to put us under the gun of state mandatory tests. the biggest thing that i can see, and this has come down over the course of the past 25 years, we have taken education from an institution, whereas everyone is -- it is mandatory that it is there, but reading today is not respected as a whole. parents do not expect their kids to read. the most ever read is a couple of quick sentences on a video game. that is about it. if there -- if they cannot read

that, the parents read it for them. guest: there are lots of issues you are talking about. we have to education systems in this country, rich and poor. -- two education systems, rich and poor. we need to address this issue. one way is to bring parents -- i am thinking of the fancy suburban neighborhood school system that uses my books and they ask parents to buy the books in the bookstores and read along. there is this commitment with parents. somehow it would help a lot to try to get parents excited about learning said that they can carry on. as far as lesson plans, i do not know what to tell you.

when i was a teacher i had to use a lesson plans. i never use them. i do not teach that way. i learned how to allied when i was in high school. what i use our shopping list. i write down the things i want to cover, and then the story evolves. everyone teaches differently. you have to have a good principle. it makes all the difference in the world. someone who is on your side, sensitive to what makes a good teacher. we also need to do more looking at good teachers. there is a good teacher that i know of. her principal understands that.

but principles sent out a note and said if you want to sit in on the class, i will see that you get a substitute. kebbel one took her up on that. -- no one took her up on that. the lesson plan now is more important than the teaching, and that is silly. also, teachers and the tests are way out of hand. teachers have to stand up for their own rights and stop being afraid they're going to lose their jobs. when i was a teacher, of which was a long time ago, i had a terrible principal who was a bully and it was a bad situation oand the teacher's would gripe about it, everyone was unhappy. when there were a teacher meetings i would boys the complaints and looked around for

someone -- their i was all by myself. teachers are scared they're going to lose their jobs. if ever there is a protected industry, it is teachers. do not worry about your job. get out there and teach well, and you will be fine. >host: what can a principle to? why are they so important? guest: they are a buffer in a way for the main office. police have now -- we have now died bring levels of administrators. the big difference between a private school that charges enormous tuition -- there is a principal and there might be layers, but there are very few

administrators in the upscale schools. you go into public schools and there is layer after layer of administrators. in denver, school administration buildings are nine-story highs. they keep the public out. 30 years a cohorgo denver had my more public school systems. there wherere nice, two-story building. it is bizarre. a lot of the teachers are not in the classroom. there have been wonderful meetings, anyway a few years ago

i went to this thing where teachers had been chosen from around the country to spend a weekend, and these were all outstanding teachers. they were sharing ideas. it was great. there was a teacher there who told about san diego. there is a school in the city that had been closed because there was so much crime. it was a mess. the school system closed it down. this teacher went to the school administration and said i would like to open the school, but with some caveats. before it was close there were a certain amount of teachers and administrators.

i want to go and nobody except for someone to answer the phone and one administrator. i want the same number of people, but i want them all to be teachers. there were articles about the school. it just worked. same kids. the teacher ratio was a much better. i do not mean to attack some administrators, because there are some good ones, but there are too many that are not. host: we have an hour and a half left. you can call in with any questions that you have, but i want to close out this first half of our program -- this is from "war, peace, and all that

jazz." you tell the story of ida ginsber frisch. she was a flapper who bob turner long hair and wore a coat with a mink caller. she was hardly beyond her teens when she won an automobile for selling more subscriptions to the newspaper than anyone else in town. guest: that was my mother. i am blessed to have wonderful parents. my mother once the card and a license came with a car. she got in the car with her sister, who 50 years later talked about how terrified she was. she did not know how to drive. i asked her, how in the world

did you sell more papers than anyone else? she said she went into the immigrant district where no one spoke english and sold the papers. my mother was terrific. she said i told them it was good for the children. she was always interested in education. having a newspaper was good for the children, she was right. my books are personal books. my father is great. you will find something on my grandfather. i wanted this to be a conversation between -- i want the children to understand that authors write books. textbooks are written by committees. good books are always a discussion region host: and they fit into the

areera you were writing about? guest: yes. a pbs special was made based on the history of us. that was pretty exciting. it was a few years ago. katee kerr recallcouric was the. he called all of his friends in hollywood and ask them to be voices. everyone that you have ever heard of in hollywood is in this series. it is astonishing. they all did it free. the klan harklenharts produced .

they turned down an astonishing people. that is available for teachers and schools. host: the dvd is, but the book is out of print. guest: that is because of the wall between a tax and trade. -- betwen text and trade. i sat in virginia with the state school board and they wanted to buy the books for all of the students. that is a lot of students. they would not sell to them because it was not -- the school sales person did not have it in his what ever. this was just a lose/lose. the people were furious. they had a chip on their

soldiers -- shoulders. this is one of the frustrations of trying to break through with a new idea that you should have real books and schools. not too long ago i got an e-mail from an administrator who wanted to buy 1000 copies of it. the last i heard she had found 500 copies on ebay. she said there was no readable u.s. history. this is on a high school level. it is easy to read and has challenging ideas. i hope to give it republish. -- republished. host: we're going to take a short break and show you a little bit of the pbs special. then we will talk about her favorite authors.

>> it was sunday on december 7, 1941. at the white house, eleanor roosevelt was preparing for a formal lunch with her husband and 30 guests. at the last minute, the president sent word he could not attend. he had just received a message from hawaii, which said air raid on pearl harbor, this is not a drill. >> the united states of america west suddenly in deliberately attacked by naval and air resources of the empire of japan. >> at 7:55 that sunday morning, a japanese planes had let bombs lose on battleship row, where u.s. warships were lined up, making a hard to miss target. by the time the plane's left,

much of the pacific fleet had been crippled or sunk. more than 2000 people were dead. >> december 7, 1941, amped date which will live and who infamy. dig a date which will live in infamy. -- a date which will live in infamy. >> america found itself at war in two parts of the world, at the eastern front and the western, atlantic and pacific. the first battles were grim. american soldiers took a terrible pounding in the pacific. >> it was scorching hot. corpses were piled everywhere. at nightfall we were attacked. when i sat up, i had to pull his pieces of gravel out of my face.

>> than the allies won three big victories in the coral sea, at midway island, and at the canal. president roosevelt rally the country in the name of freedom. -- rally the country in the name of freedom. >> freedom means human rights everywhere. >> [inaudible] >> i have a lot of women's rights in the books, but the question is, and i considered writing a book on the women's right s movement? -- have ai considered writing a

book on women's rights movement? other people have done a wonderful books on that, and probably will continue to. i will be do something about women. i read you a bit from the chapter on the negro leagues. this is a sidebar on the same chapter. it is called "were the men scared?" the yankees were playing a game. chattanooga's sawhors owner hadt signed a 17-year-old pitcher, jackie mitchell. when the great babe came to the

plate, a new pitcher was called to the mound. mitchell was a she. her first pitch was low and a ball. babe ruth missed. he did not like mixissing anyone's pitch. he demanded to see the ball. there was nothing wrong with the ball. he threw his bat, stopped off, and the crowd roared. the next batter was lou gehrig. jackie to route 3 times. derek strong at three times, and that was that. -- gehrig swung three times, and

that was that. the years later, she said i had a drop pitch in when i was throwing it right, you could not touch it. the baseball commissioner did not care. he was a misogynist wh, which ms someone who did not like women. her contract was void. baseball lost out. sometimes telling stories like that tells you a lot about the times. the baseball commissioner wasn't prejudiced against women and people of color. we had to wait to get rid of him before there could be progress. what is the word i just caught you? misogynist.

you can look it up to see how it is spelled. i love big words. i tried to use them a lot.

host: we are back live with joy hakim, author of several different volumes on u.s. history and currently working on a bunch of books. guest: actually there are two ways to come at writing.

you can ride out of expertise -- write out of expertise. the other way is to write to learn. i have been a newspaper reporter for a number of years. i was asked to be a business writer, and i said i do not know anything about business. the editor said it is ok, you aren't good learner and you will learn. i wanted to learn science so i jumped into it. -- debtor said it is ok, you are a good learner, and you will learn. the difference between my books and those by a specialist, and i have all of them reviewed by specialists, but i think i have the "gee whiz" quality.

host: you describe albert einstein, who is pictured in the story of "einstein at a new hddw subject." guest: he was a character. he was larger than life. he was very bright, but he had an attitude in college. he enjoyed all of his professors -- key and away the -- he annoyed all of his professors. he was a smart alec. he had great friends. his friends appreciated how

brilliant he was, his teachers did not. host: we will put the numbers back up in case you are interested in talking with joy hakim. i want to read just a little bit from the story of science, but einstein volume -- the einstein volum. e." " the manhattan project might have been the most ambitious project that humans have ever undertaken. was it a success? if you can decide that for yourself. it was spectacular as zero works of science and technology.

the german scientists believed it was impossible to make a bomb in time for this war, so they never convinced hitler to give them enough money to make it happen, but the allies did not know that." guest: are we better off having an atomic bomb? i guess it might have happened anyway, i do not know, but it was a spectacular government- science collaboration in the short time. it was very exciting if you think just in terms of the science. most of the science is about the time that they realized what they were doing. many of them change their mind. after the war, many got into the peace process. gueshost: do you think it is

important for students to make up their own mind? guest: yes. i am not even sure what i think , but the story of the manhattan project is fascinating. host: in the story of science, aristotle leads the way. why did you start with him? guest: we did not teach science history at all. we're not teaching science. we lived in the greatest scientific era of ever. what happens in the 20th- century is spectacular -- we're not teaching it. we're not teaching quantum theory and relativity, the sciences that underlie our times. yesterday i sat next to a young man, a senior in high school,

very bright kid, very personable. i think he will go far in this generation. he wants to be a lawyer. i asked him, had he studied anything about quantum theory and relativity: ? no. we started talking, and i think i generated interest. you cannot study chemistry or biology unless you have a background in physics. these three books are a base, and i would like to see them used in middle schools. there has been a physics first movement. leon letterman has been at the forefront of it. he has not been successful. he has been getting high schools to change to have physics first.

i do not think that will work. they are too set in their ways. if we can get middle school kids to understand quantum theory and the history of science seahaw, n high schools will have to change. the idea that a lot of people opt out of silence. most of my friend sauy -- science, i am a literary person. science is for other people. not anymore. you cannot claim to be educated in the 21st century if you do not know. host: u.n. to of liberal arts school. -- you went to a liberal arts

school. guest: one of the reasons we do not do it is because we do not teach science history. we need to do that. host: you start off with aristotle on the cover. you start off with genesis. you also start off with a hindu poem and other religious texts. guest: those are creation tex. they give us a place in the universe. but today's science also tells us about our place in the universe. we need to be aware of that, and understand it and balance it with whatever religious beliefs we have. we have certainly proved the big

bang. the story of evolution of the universe is pretty exciting stuff. the universe is 13.7 billion years old. the earth is only 5 billion years. we have these stories. i am writing about the making of the earth itself ho. there were all of these articles of clothing around the sun and hitting each other. then a huge astrid came careening toward earth, and it hit at an ankle. -- and it hit at an angle. that is why we are tilted.

host: is there a place for religion and science? guest: i do not know if there is a place, but they can coexist. most of us have a spiritual side and have as spiritual system, such as i see them as separate, non-conflicting parts of me. host: had you been criticized for starting off this way? guest: i have been criticized because i have a chapter that goes into world history, and i mention three names, -- and moses, and jesus, and muhammed. there is a critic on the internet about that. they are part of our culture. host: no joke, the earth is

pancake flat. that is one of your titles. . . caller: my question is, could

the lack of history being taught and the last 10 or 20 years be a great scheme of being able to rewrite history because the younger generation never learned it? and my main question for her is, obama has said that he wants to reform education. what direction do you think he is going to take us in? i will go ahead and listen. hoguest: i am not a conspiracy theorist. i do not think there has spent any scheme. it is business interests that run schools to make money and that is a problem. we need to open up schools to all the books that are out there. i don't know. i cannot speak for obama. i am concerned about some of what i am reading about technology -- business interests. the technology companies.

there is an article this week on a consortium of technology groups. there will be a lot of money spent. they are lining up together. unless they find good riderswri the writing gets the least amount of income. host: should every student have a laptop? guest: yes. our kids need to know how to work computers in the computer age. if you know what quantum theory is, you will know where the computer come from. host: what is quantum theory? guest: the smaller than atomic world. the signs that we are teaching primarily is a 19th century science or earlier -- newtonian science. which is the science of the world we inhabit. so that if i throw a ball at

you, the trajectory of that ball follows new's rules. most of what we learn in school is the size of the macro world. but there is an atomic world and the atomic world does not follow those rules. and that is the quantum world. to give you an idea of the size of an atom, taken at all and blow it up until it is the size of the earth. the atoms in at apple are the same size as the original apple. that is how small atoms are. no magnified scope has ever seen and atom or ever will. you have seen pictures. they are done with electronic tunneling microscopes. yeah, it is so small this atomic world that it hurts your head to think about it. the rules are different.

atoms never die. in our world, we have the second law of thermodynamics. things run out and die. atoms are forever and they are all moving. this table which seems solid is full of atoms that are moving -- slowly but they are moving. they are scrunched together. they are so astonishingly small that they are scrunched together and give the illusion of solidity. leave this in a tomb or ceiling up for a few thousand years, and the atoms will deteriorate by themselves because the atoms are moving. you open a bottle of perfume and the atoms which are moving will scoot out. but the same thing will happen with this. and a bar of iron. their rules of engagement are totally different. that is the quantum world.

host: what the practical effects of that? guest: in 1900, a little more than 100 yars ago, we were not sure that atoms existed. in 1905, einstein davis proved that they were. we did not have any idea that you're is an unbelievably small entity. we discovered that it is really small and the nucleus hold most of the matter, the mass of the atom. and we learned all the rules, we learned about electrons w ooshing around. i think this is the greatest intellectual achievement in the history of humankind -- understanding the atom. once we did that, we could understand quantum theory. the rolls -- the uncertainty principle, all of this.

then we could have an electronic revolution. all the things in the studio are because we understand quantum theory. it is pretty amazing stuff. as is relativity. the method involves is difficult. -- the math involved is difficult. you and i can only go so far. but we can both understand the ideas. and yet we keep those from our kids. i don't understand. and it is so exciting, and we live in a world -- host: i feel like i am in eighth grade again. i remember being taught there were electrons and neutrons. i wasn't very good at science. guest: the picture you have in your mind is not the way it really looks. the basic idea -- that was boris atom, and we have gone much further. the electrons are in a cloud.

they're very fast. it is fascinating. read my book. host: i am. guest: i would like to tell you something about that particular book. the first two books -- i had experts read them. but the third book was a challenge. this stuff is top. i had finished the book on einstein -- this of this tough. -- this stuff is tought. . they had found some things wrong. i had fixed it. and it was done. then i got an email from edwin taylor at mit. i think today he is one of the greatest physics educators. he has to know a little more about physics than i do.

he offered a few suggestions on science writing. he had read an article about me. anyway, i just got my lasso out. anybody who wants to help or gets involved -- >> i went back to him and said, if you want to help me, i can use some help. thinking he would give it a third quickly. and then i would get it published. -- by getting a third quick read. he started reading the book and he came back to me and said, are you sure someone read this book? i spent the next year and a half with edwin taylor with it -- like a personal tutorial. learning physics. we re-wrote the whole book. this is the einstein volume. he is the author of watches the

greatest textbook for students in quantum theory in relativity. archibald wheeler was one of the great physicist of our time, hence the physics department of princeton and university of texas -- i was sitting in a restaurant in denver, a japanese restaurant outside it. studying edwin taylor;''s physis book. reading with great intensity. eating might sushi and seaweed or whatever. i was just very conscience that there was a presence standing next to me. i looked up. and there is this handsome, tall, from sweden, and he said, that book. where did you get that book? i said i am working with the author. he said, you are working with

the author? can i sit down? he said that with me. he had a girlfriend of in the distance it standing there. i have total attention. he read that book in sweden and said, that is the greatest text book i ever read. we talked about it. a few days later, i was with a friend of mine and i told her this and she said, where did you get that book? all my life i've been looking for a book that would attract men. i said, whatever. it is a great book. in the text -- which appreciate textbook riders. this is not for high school students. it is due -- to zero difficult. it starts with a parable. it is a wonderful book. max borne who was a friend of einstein's and a nobel prize winner, it was an artistic endeavor. in the explanation of science

and history and things like that take it real creative skill. max borne was olivia newton- john's grandfather. great scientist. but he appreciates the importance of a textbook writing. edwin worked with me for a year- and-a-half. that book is good science. caller: joy, it is a joy to hear you speak of these things. i have one suggestion. i read some months ago and "times magazine," it takes the future about seven years to get up to speed. in those early years, especially those of us know how difficult it is to try to write one lesson, rather than be able to write lesson plans for every

subject, especially in science. i love to hear you speak as a teacher. you did such a good job with your book. i wonder if maybe it is possible for you to work with some of these wonderful teachers and make, not lesson plans, but scripps. ts. and maybe even half boxes of the materials teachers needed. so that when they get ready to do a lesson, they could see a video of the wonderful -- that have all the scripts that they needed to get up in the class. and could have maybe even some videos of the things that you

have done with the teachers in signs and history -- in science and history. guest: first of all, i am a writer. i am not in the classroom. i feel like i am a partner with a teacher. but we do have incredibly good materials to go with all of these books. with the history books, oxford has done it teacher materials for elementary school and teacher materials for middle and high school. and today are kind of standard stuff. -- they are kind of standard stuff. and education team at johns hopkins discovered the history books and was using them in their programs for particularly going into inner-city schools. i was sitting at my desk and i got this email saying, we have

done teaching materials for your books. they did them for their own use. would you like to see them? yeah, sure. i was totally unprepared for what they said. it was incredibly extensive stock. hundreds of pages for each book. there is an assessment books. there is everything. oxford has published the johns hopkins stuff which is terrific. it is imaginative. it is too much for some teachers that are overwhelmed by it. but there is a hopkins material. there is oxford, there is an assessment book. the science books. johns hopkins wrote materials for the first two books, which address them as reading books. and it also has coordinated experiments that are really good. and for the third book, nsta is the co publisher.

the national science teachers association. a teacher named it juliana did teaching materials to go with the einstein but. they blow me away. if you are a member, you can download the free. -- that free. whahost: what is the website? can you go to your web site and find it? guest: it is joyhakim.com. it should be there. host: who keeps your web site updated? guest: the smithsonian people. host: fort myers, florida. it is an alleged that boys still like to read but the harry potter cedars has proved they will if you give them the right books. it -- have you found that boys and girls have responded differently to your books on

science? guest: the first teacher for use my books in virginia beach. i went to the school board. i had been a reporter. i knew all the people. i want to try this with kids in a classroom. i assumed there would ask for a volunteer and i would have a teacher that was eager to work with me. they assign me to a teacher. she was very unhappy. the picture with good reason because she had to be out social study classes. a fifth grade teachers. one was going to use a standard textbook and the other was going to use my manuscript. i made two preparations for her. she was unhappy. she was also at first. when i came back a few weeks later, she had totally change. and she said, if she gave the kids in the classroom with a standard textbooks three pages to read, they usually did not

read it. she said, i can give them 10 pages or you are -- of yours -- this is a great man is good. they want to read more. -- of your manusscript and they want to read more. girls are much more apt to fall the rules. they will read more. boys will. on't. in one of the books, i describe how you load a musket. there is a different. host: if you want to email or tweet, twitter.com/booktv -- -- as opposed to specific scientific material for zoobug 64. guest: i don't think we

should teach critical thinking. it is be able to think. one of my sons had a course called critical thinking. i asked him what it was like. he said, boring you teach the history and science and give them something to critically think about. to put them in the abstract it doesn't work. if you write a compared of paper, comparing any two things, you have to think critically. compare apples and oranges. how are they different or how are they alike, particularly if you get into his drink. tory. host: what about liberal arts education? guest: i am all for it? it makes you think. it gives you access to the great minds of the past. you need some much vocational education. i think we need a national discussion on what we mean by

educating. but what i am hearing from this administration and others is we need to do something about education because we are not providing workers for our industry. is that the purpose of education, to turn out employees? or is it the purpose to and rich individuals who will then that become thinking employees? host: philip in brisbane, california. caller: thank you very much. as i have studied the history of my state, as an adult, it seems to me that what i was taught as a child, particularly about the native tribes in my area, was this informational -- disinformation. how do i go about finding a textbook that was in use 50 years ago? and if you were to try to do a search like that, would you first searched the library of congress or seek out publishers?

how would you go about that? guest: i am astonished at how much i can get on the internet as a start. i would start there. the library of congress would be someplace else. 50 years ago we were not doing a great job with native tribes. we were buys about that. we are doing a better job today. -- we were biased about that. i went into a lot of used bookstores. it takes a little digging and work, but we should be able to find that out. host: joy hakim's "freedom" book is 27 ties. tell the true history. boring. -- it is too -- did you keep anything of that book? guest: not because i am trying

to please them. i only please myself. i am tough on racial issues, on slavery. so i am not sure what she thinks i sanitized. host: are there past controversies comparable to current debates on a roll of science and scientists like the climate change issue? guest: climate change is a really major kind of thing. signs became a popular endeavor only in the 19th century -- science became a popular endeavor. before that, jefferson -- science suddenly became very popular. before that, maybe it was just left to the scientists. there was a lot of debate, when we first found dinosaur bones and 19th century. we found these bones for a long

time but there were considered mythical beings. we began to look at them scientifically and rationally and began to understand. there was debate about what they were. i think we are in a unique time right now. at the end of the 19th century, the president of harvard, based on word from scientists, told his students not to study physics because everything that had been discovered pretty much had been discovered in physics. this was just as we were about to enter the greatest era of physics ever. he picked up on a speech by the first nobel-prize winner in this country who said the same thing. and then along came einstein, and they were all wrong. but science has really come into

its own in recent times. i think there's more awareness out. host: connor in cleveland, ohio. you are on with joy hakim. caller: i should be asking you about quantum physics because i am one of these english-major lawyers. i want to get your take on a college education in general. i do some tutoring in cleveland and in washington, d.c., to the baroque cities where the difference between the haves and have-nots is fairly clear. what about people who lack the necessary foundation to go to college? is it always the answer? guest: this is not my field of expertise. i am answering as a layperson. i don't know that much about college. but i would say probably not. if we had a really solid high- school foundation, i would

think that there are many people who don't necessarily need to go to college but we should beat -- we should be graduating high- school students who know more. in denver, for instance, there is a high school that i know about in a hispanic neighborhood were only 24% of the students graduate. that is appalling. and they graduate without much of an education at all. this particular school, right here it is a school that i spent time in, and it is run by the diocese. it is a private school. gets its kicks from the same neighborhood. and all those kids go on -- it gets its kids from the same neighborhood. this particular school is especially interesting. they may get on $4,000 per kid. were denver public schools spent $8,000 per kid.

the principal told me that denver came to them and said, we would like to incorporate you. you don't have to worry about money anymore. you'll get $8,000. the principal fought long and hard and he realized he would have to fire all of his death, because they did not have the teaching courses, the teaching credentials. there are a lot of roles that are keeping schools from -- we have a whole generation of people my age who could be in schools helping out. who would volunteer it does take the village to raise a kid. our schools should be bringing in the lawyers and doctors, who are retired and who have time and would love to be called on. i actually ran a program in virginia, in which i brought in members of the community. i got the president of the largest bank in virginia, who was a science buff. he came in every friday

afternoon. i got butterfly expert. he had gone to the amazon. i had a doctor who came and taught chess to kids. they acted as if i was giving them a gift. these are very busy executives -- they were dying to do this for kids. there are a lot of people out there who will help. host: 0 plus 0 -- oklahoma city e-mails, i believe that our elementary schools would be better service with a history teacher, of math teachers that all first graders in the college model. that is why our elementary schools are weak. and have no mastery of their jobs. guest: i don't agree. i like the socratic model, where the teacher is learning with the students. one of mites sons went to st. john's college.

-- one of my sons went to st. john's college in annapolis. the teachers teach everything. and they learned with the kids. they give a lot of initiatives to the students. there is self-discovery. everybody learns everything together. if you have bright people, science is discovery. first of all, we are not going to get science majors teaching in second grade. we have some. and it is exciting. but we will not get many. so we have to find another way. and get the right people in schools. it we went to the national sciee foundation, a big meeting a couple of years ago in boulder to address the signs crisis in schools. -- the science crisis in

schools. there were all kinds of educators to try and figure out how to improve science education. they let the general public come and in. i sat there and listened. when i arrive, was given a booklet about what was wrong with a science education. i thought, wow. whoever wrote this has got it. it is very well written. it zeroed in on all the problems. i was to learn during the course of the date that this book like had been written 20 years earlier when the nsf had another meeting. nothing had changed. things have gotten worse in the 20 years. i sat all day listening to all of these experts. at the end of the day, they said that the answer was to pay teachers more and to get more science majors in elementary and middle schools. that is exactly what they had

asked for 20 years before. it is not going to happen so let's use the teachers we have and educate them and give the books that will teach them and bring them some of the excitement that comes with learning. host: you have mentioned your family. let's start with sam. guest: sam is my husband. he has been very supportive. he has an actor. he has acted and directed. he is doing something in virginia beach. she was in virginia beach for a staged reading of a new plague. sam is teacy. he is teaching at an osha lifelong learning institute, an adjunct of denver university. he has taught theater there. he is going to be teaching a course in mccarthy -- the mccarthy era in the winter. host: what did he do?

guest: he is a retired businessman. host: now he is teaching? guest: yes, and his teeth -- and he is acting. host: readers of "the new york times" might know who danny is. guest: he is our youngest son. danny is great. he went to st. john's college. he won a pulitzer prize this year. for investigative reporting. he is head of the albany bureau. he broke the eliot spitzer story. danny has two little boys -- casey and eli. casey is a world expert on space. he knows all about the apollo missions and he loves space. host: any other kids? guest: jeff is the associate

dean for science at american university. he is a mathematician. he is wonderful. danny is married to latest blue is a writer and she just had an article in "the new york times" about a school in search togo were kids, kindergarten kids are outdoors, rain or shine for three hours every morning. jeff is married to a speech pathologist in the maryland schools. she is wonderful. i think the kids are all perfect. and jeff is terrific. he is a typical mathematician. few words but a lot of thinking. they have a baby, mimi, who is adorable. i am going to be seen her. and then ellen. ellen is in denver. that is why we're there. she is a dynamo and she is

gorgeous. she is my daughter. she is a marketing director for a firm. she is flying all over the country. and her husband is a landscape architect. he is a partner in a firm called design workshop which is the best plastic aleandscape architn the country. and they have two children. sam is at the university of colorado. and natalie is gorgeous and wonderful and she wants to be a chef. host: were you a busybody mom when the kids were growing up? guest: it was difficult. i will say that danny was trying to describe his mother to a friend, and he said, to give you an idea, our favorite tv station is c-span. host: also appearedwesome.

jeff and berkeley, california. caller: i am trying to be concise, but my son's experience is with nominally episcopal, private schools. it is hard to get in. expensive. the issue there is there were no religious or political filters hampering the teachers. i don't know what demands there were put under, but they were pretty much open to teach without any criticism. the only thing that parents were interested in it is, what college can you get my kid into? but you mentioned freda callo. in to pick them apart, she was married to diego rivera, who was a communist. he came to the detroit area and somehow got money from the ford family, but his murals were not

always accepted because of the communist witch. twitch. to bring these things out, in teaching history and in science, it gets filtered out. i had a little experience in a public high school where my history teacher was a very good. he was inhibited from saying certain things. that is my point. if you can take off from that -- i think the filters to get in a public school are tough and inhibit a teacher and inhibit teaching. guest: we have got to teach everything. if you are really steading chairman history, you sure readmei mein kampf. he should know about communist. if you're scared of ideas, you should make them attractive. if you cannot read something, it will make you want to. what is communism and why his

appeal to so many people? if we have a political philosopher lit -- philosophy that we feel is superior, the only way to make that case is to understand the other. i wrote my books for upper elementary or middle school. you can only go so far, but the eighth book in my series, i call the economics book. in that book, i define economic systems. so i have a definition of communism and other free markets and of socialism. we certainly cannot keep them away from kids. nor, should we. host: you call it in age of extremes. guest: you had the labor movement. you had the robber barons. all of them had excesses and good and bad. we have so much polarization and

knee-jerk polarization, we cannot see the good in those who think differently than we do. none of us is perfect or has it all right . host: lebanon, tennessee. good afternoon. caller: i teach u.s. history to eighth graders. and i love u.s. history. i continue to read and learn about it. thank you for "freedom: a history of us". my problem is teaching u.s. history is motivating my students. do you have any advice for teachers of students who think they do not need to know u.s. history? guest: i would give them projects. i don't know if you know about national history day. i love that. it is an organization.

a lot of kids, maybe 600,000 or more participate, and they do projects in history to very high standards. it is a competition. you compete with kids in your own great. you can do a paper. that is usually the least popular. you can do a story board. a lot of the kids -- i have been a judge -- and a lot of the kids have been judged on plays. you can do an individual play where you write and perform it. or you can do the groupthink. the quality of the stuff that kids do. some of the things i have seen, i cannot imagine doing it even as well. this is just on the local, state level and the winner come to washington. i judge in washington. by that time, you are getting good performances. whether you participate in national history date or not,

that method of teaching. there is a teacher in denver who, all for kids every year to take part in national history date. and they usually win. some of this stuff is so. and so wonderful. poignant. the last time i went, i had gotten on to some people with disney, the creative people, the idea people. i told them, you have to come to natural history date. i dragged them kicking and screaming. they were blown away. one woman was weeping over one of the episodes that these kids did. there were to grow that we saw that they could not get over one. these two little boys did a play about the irish-british conflict. and they wrote letters. the play was about two boys who

grew up together and then separated. they wrote letters back and forth. and in these letters, which the children made up, they explained the conflict. at the end, one of the boys, who is a soldier dies. it is something to weep about. then we also watched four girls who did a play on nurses during the vietnam war. i had read all the stuff on vietnam, it never occurred -- i had not thought about it. they described the war from the point of view of active nurses. it was so insightful. i would say to you, projects. get kids to be creative. and research. with national history day, you do this to high standards. it cannot make up stuff. we need much more of that. host: at the same time you said earlier, you did not think dressing up as pilgrims -- guest: i do not want to say that

i don't think you should do that. you should also be reading. we now have a history program that is all experiential. it is all dressing up. if you dress up into don't do the research, if it is just a momentary thing where the teacher sets the scene, the kids don't research themselves, and they are doing an experiential -- that's fine, but you don't remember. we need to have them participate and dress up and pretend, but the pretense has to be based on something actually. in the third book, i talk about, colonies to country -- about how history is pretending in a way. but attending based on information. -- pretending based on information. host: had their e-mails, if you

mention the kent state massacre or wounded need to high school student, they have no idea what that is. guest: they don't know what the anomaly is. they don't know about the civil rights movement. -- they don't know what vietnam is. they know rosa parks. my 10th book goes into kent state in all of that. there are stories there. if you divide your class up into different kids take different projects and come back to that class, they will all learn. host: frank in texas. caller: my question is involving politics and science. 1953, the americans -- society published a book on environmental science, then we got a doctor in california who said -- the manufacture sulfuric acid which is in direct opposition to the proper chemistry i learned.

today i see environmental science, let's take for example, ozone. nobody is told that the ozone has a half life of 20 minutes and then it changes in minimum of six times completely in the stratosphere, which defies the probability that you will have an ozone hole. host: what is your question? caller: the role of politics in modern science. today, politics has taken over all of science. guest: i am sure it has. that is something i am not expert on. i think it takes a village to raise a kid. i think we need to have more and more scientists and people in the community getting into schools. if you have ideas and information, get out there to your local schools or put stuff on the internet. reach as widely as you can so we

can have those discussions. host: an e-mail -- in reading reviews on your science series, i have found numerous arguments that state an attack upon the christian faith in compiling the history of science, especially in the middle ages. my question is, do you find an absolute divide between faith and reason? guest: i am astonished on amazon how good the reviews are. i am writing books on biology and change over time, which is another way of saying evolution. i think i will have a lot of trouble with parts of the religious community. i seem to get myself into tough things. i don't think there should be a gap between science and religion. i think it is imperative, actually, that we address this issue and talk about it.

i am certainly not attacking the christian faith. but if you are a hard-liner and only see things through a narrow prism, then i don't know. write your own books or there are books that will address your issues. don't read mine. host: tucson, arizona. caller: 40 years ago, the teacher -- i am a locomotive engineer -- i am curious about college entrance exams and competition to get into schools. our home schooling parents capable of challenging their own children sufficiently to prepare them to take the achievement tests and entrance exams which are required to get into good colleges and universities? guest: i said before that a pretty much only need good teachers, because when i go in to conferences, it is the teachers who are there. i would say the same thing with home schoolers. i have met a lot. i am blown away by them.

i think they are probably -- if you are going to have a sliding scale, the best home schoolers provide an education and better than anyone else, because it is what -- one-on-one, they have flexibility. they take their kids places. they learn with their kids. it is astonishing what the really good home schoolers to. i talked to one family, and they all participate. they were teaching their kids the greek and latin an elementary school, because you cannot find schools. i am a big enthusiast when it comes to home schooling. i have a friend who is out in the real world and sees something else. she keeps telling me, you don't know what some of these, coolers are home schoolers are doing. they are neglecting their kids. i am sure that is true. just like a lot of public schools are. host: in the religious

community, a lot of home schoolers teach for religious reasons. guest: and they like my books very much. there are extremists. and there are those who don't. the homeschooling community and the religious right -- i am amazed and delighted, and i do think i have fans on left and right. and i think american history is where we can all come together, and we should use that to celebrate what we are and talk about our differences. host: about 5 million of your books are in print? guest: have been sold. host: how many school systems are using them? guest: my publishers don't tell me that. not as many as should be. that is because of the adoption system. i will tell you what happened in

indiana last year or the year before -- they adopted new history books. we were not even in the mix, because there were not willing to go to the process which was too hard. and too expensive. so they adopted, they have an adoption list, and then schools choose between them. after the adoption process was finished, the indiana school board looked at the books. they were so appalled by the books that they had adopted, that they said none of these are viable. none should be used. there was a big article in the newspaper. that is when i first became aware of it. then the people, the school administrators said, we have gone to the process. we have to send them out. these are the books that children -- the teachers got to choose between. and it came with a letter from the school board, this is

education malpractice using is. it was bizarre. one of the problems in one of the reasons that publishers like mine don't want to get involved -- indiana is a relatively small state -- after you go through the adoption process, you have to said salespeople to every town, city and hamlet for presentations. they all this work it -- they all work this out, so on monday you are in this state. on tuesday, you are here. in indiana, it is an eight-week process you have two sales people from the whole office. you try to find somebody from indiana. that is very expensive. eight weeks. to say nothing of salaries and presentations. the books that come out of this are the ones that have the best presentations. the salespeople have been working on lighting up, making

themselves very nice to the key people. this is not -- forget all of this. first of all, you should not have this formal kind of thing. have someone in indiana or california, whatever, go out and look at the books available and let them be the decision makers. not have it based on fancy presentations from publishers who hire people to do nothing but make presentations. and then there is a lot of corruption that goes with this. oxford did have a sales person in california who told me, i know this second hand, but i am sure it is true, that they were asked to make it $10,000 contribution in one city to get considered. which they did not do, nor, should they have. south carolina did in adoption of few years ago, and they asked

me to be a speaker at their social studies conference. this is an adoption year. i had something else. i did not want to do it. there was a lot of pressure. and the head of social studies for the state was one of those who urged me. i went down and gave my speech. no one would talk to me. this man who made me too, would not have a cup of coffee with me. i thought, what is going on? in the time between when they asked me and this conference, he had been hired to be there salesperson. so he left the schools. 9% of the state went with what his books -- 90% of the state. don't do it this way, guys. the book they adopted has no rating. it is all work. -- it has no reading.

there is no textbook. textbooks are no good. therefore, we will do workbooks. this is a scandal. host: joan in portland, oregon. caller: 2 white infinitely c- span -- thank you. i have a question. your first reference to getting their attention of potential learners. once upon a time, on this very channel, i did get attention in trying to engage the world in pursuit of a nobel peace prize, making the mistake of not. ing ou pointing out how many wau can spell nobel peace prize.

which is the premise-date in my teaching -- what we hear and have no opportunity to directly understand from the person, or the source, giving information. i worship messengers. my question -- how do you deal and have -- to your own personal welfare? because anything you have offered in the way of engaging people in pursuits of education and learning together? guest: i have not had threats to my life for anything. there's a guy on the west coast to is very obnoxious. he used to call me at home and had some suggested remarks. i asked him never to call me again. he started putting stuff on the web. that is about the most unpleasant thing. some people like my books and

some don't. that is the way it should be. a one r -- one other thing on the adoption process. teachers are the only professionals who don't get to choose their own tools. why should every teacher in this city or state use the same book? i might want to teach -- host: is there a cost efficiency? guest: may be. certainly with my books, if you buy in quantity. if you buy 1,000 -- we're talking huge numbers when a coal state or city -- one that allows flexibility? in the western part of virginia, in montgomery county, virginia, which is different from montgomery county, maryland -- the supervisor chose two books, to adopt two books, mine and a standard textbook. he gave each school the

opportunity to pick. half the schools went one way and have the other way. seven years later she gave them the same choice, and only one school chose the textbook. if you make the choice, then you are committed to it. when i was teaching here, i was asked to teach a subject i did not want to teach. i did not like the textbook. i agree to teach it if i could pick my own textbook, which i did. the text book i picked was terrible. i made a bad choice. but i had chosen it, and i was going to make it work. let teachers make that decision. don't force it on them curren. host: here is the fifth grade teacher who uses your books. he says, i am lucky to use her

book, "freedom: a history of us", in my fifth grade classroom. the reason they worked so well is the quality of writing. joy is absolutely right about the poor quality professional development offered by school districts. that is not to say all professional development is bad. the folks at the center for civic for education know how to provide equality trading as well as quality teaching materials. guest: thank you for those comments. the big thing is professional development. they are vultures out there getting in and trying to make money. we the people, which is civic development, does a very good job. gilder lehrmann is fabulous. be very selective. the publishing houses are now sending out professional -- they

either charge for it or they put it into the cost of the book. they send out professional development people. i spent a lot of time as wrtier in residence in los angeles, and the teachers talk about the professional development people as gestapo agents. they were forcing teachers to use their books. so, yeah. professional development, teachers need help. host: is it important to have a national department of education? guest: we did not have one until relatively recently. i don't know. i think maybe, yes, that it is. but the more centralized things are, the more uniform the further we get from trusting the individual teacher. if we don't trust our teachers and treat them like professionals and intelligent

people that many of the mam are, it is good teachers who make the difference. most of us, if we are lucky at all, can look back on a really great teacher. i grew up in vermont, which did not have great teachers. i had a high school english teacher who changed my life and everybody who had there. we all came out able to write. after i wrote these books, i searched for her. she was in a nursing home in england. i center thank you no. -- i sent her a thank you note. a lot of teachers today want to be loved. but this teacher was a stern, new england tight. i was scared for. i did not like her. but when i got to smith college, i was -- i could write better than most kids who may have, from this press schools. -- fancy prep schools.

host: our guest is an joy hakim. joy hakim.com. thank you for being with us. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the debate on health care continues in the senate. democratic lawmakers wrapping up a meeting with president obama. majority leader harry reid is now briefing reporters. >> and i expressed that there. there are still a few things we have to work out in the bill. issues are being narrowed as we speak. we are working towards a consensus. we are not there, but we understand how important it is we all arrive at a consensus and we will do it as quickly as we

can. if a question were asked, what is your disappointment? my disappointment is, we have not have a single public statement from the republicans that they will do anything to help us with the bill. quite to the country. and that is too bad for the american people. the american people, last year, called for change and change is taking place the president did spend some time going to things we had accomplished this year. it may have been significant, based on where he was when he took office. even before he became president, 670,000 jobs were lost in december, november, more 700,000. -- more than 700,000.

we have made great progress. >> why have you asked the five progresses it to come together and what is the status? >> i called and personally asked five moderates and five progressives to work things out on the issues they care a lot about. public option, small business. . .

>> people are going to look back on what this congress did, and each time they see a child being able to go to dr. lanier sick or hurt, seeing -- be able to go to a doctor when they are sick or hurt, having diabetes does not mean a lifetime of not being able to get insurance, that is what this legislation is all about. we are not there yet. we are working hard to find out when we're going to start the procedural process to finish this legislation. we have the abortion issue that is not over with yet. we will have an amendment and i spoke with senator nelson today and i believe you offer that

tomorrow. >> senator lieberman said [inaudible] and the thing that is significant? -- and do you think that is significant? >> center turley berman said that after the meeting as well -- senator lieberman said that to me after the meeting as well. >> [inaudible] >> some have said the president needs to come in and take a side on these issues. will that help? >> the president has been available, any time, day or night. i have called them both. once in awhile what i call, he is in the situation room, but other than that, he is available and we have had tremendous support with secretary salazar, we have had secretary sibelius,

baseball been tremendous. the unsung hero as far as i'm concerned has been jim mesina. he knows the issues and understand the senate and he has been terrific. >> [inaudible] >> you are going to have to talk louder. >> [inaudible] >> we are still where we were yesterday and we're doing just fine. one question was not passed, but let me say republicans love to talk about this legislation being a surprise to them. we have some statistics here that speak volumes. remember, we had a vote by

saturday evening because we wanted to make sure the bill was on the floor and had an ample opportunity for people to look at it even after it was filed, even though it had been available to anyone who wanted to look at it on the internet for almost 10 days. on this legislation, just the finance committee, the process there, we have not had legislation that has been so transparent in recent history. the senate finance committee had public meetings on health care reform, 53 of them. the finance committee had just the markup itself, which was very public eight days.

it has been 22 years since we have had a marked up that has taken eight days. the finance committee considered 135 different amendments. the health committee, which we all know the bill on the floor is merge between health and finance, the health committee posted their richest -- their legislation six days before the markup. the health committee, the number of round tables, hearings, walk- throughs, 47. the number of days the health committee spent marking of health insurance reform legislation -- 13 days. the number of amendments health committee considered -- 300. so for them to talk about non

transparency is to talk about the rest of the bill as they have talked about this not being transparent. they are in a different universe. they're talking about this bill being for illegal immigrants, this bill running up the deficit, which is absolutely false. this bill running up premiums, absolutely false. republicans are being destructive, they want this to be, as one senator said, president obama's waterloo, and it's not going to be. thank you, everybody. >> majority leader harry reid on his meeting with president obama earlier today as we look at pictures now of the president are arriving for his meeting with senate democrats. debate on health care continues in the senate this afternoon. votes are set for 3:1542 amendments. we're awaiting the arrival of

the president -- pictures of him arriving for the caucus with democratic leaders. earlier, senate republicans offered their thoughts on the progress of the debate on health care in the senate. >> good afternoon, everyone. i think the fact the president of the guided states is over meeting with democrats only tells you where this debate has gone. earlier in the year, there was talk about producing a bill that 80 of 100 senators could support, doing it on a truly bipartisan basis, but instead, as you have followed this over the weeks and months, it has drifted off into a completely partisan effort to take a half a trillion dollars in cuts out of medicare, $400 billion in new taxes, produce higher premiums for a 85% of the country, and

not surprisingly that's not a bill that generates much enthusiasm on our side of the aisle. so here we are, a few weeks before christmas, with the democrats trying to squeeze every single one of their members to swallow a pretty bitter pill for the american people. let me call on senator mccain. >> i don't like to refer back to the last campaign for obvious reasons all the time. but the fact is, last october, one year ago, the president of the united states and i repeated this so often -- i have it practically committed to memory -- when we get into health care reform, there will be republicans in the room, democrats in the room c-span cameras -- i think you should go right on over to the meeting there because that was the commitment made that the c-span cameras would be in there so the

american people would know who is on the side of the insurers and pharmaceuticals and who is on the side of the american people. also, there's going to be a change in climate in washington. i would love for the president to come be with a 40 of us on this side of the aisle and we can have a discussion with him about why we feel so strongly there needs to be medical malpractice reform in this legislation, why we feel people should be able to go across state lines and get health insurance, why it is we think well does and it is should be emphasized in this legislation, why is that trial lawyers seem to have dictated the language of this legislation that in 2000 pages, there is no significant reference whatsoever to medical malpractice reform. i noted on the front page of the "washington post" this morning, and maybe it's the reason why the president is here. deals cut with health groups may

be at peril. deals cut with health groups may be at peril. yesterday, we had a very spirited discussion on the floor of the senate about particular deals that have been made and i made reference to the deal pharmaceutical companies have made and others have made, and there was some pullback that maybe it was an unfair characterization. here you see it and it has been reported in other media outlets. it's time to stop this behind closed doors routine they have been going through and deal cutting. let's do with the president said last october a year ago. let's sit down together, republicans and democrats, with c-span in the room negotiate so american people can see what's going on here. it is not an accident that the longer this process goes forward, the more and more americans are against this massive, 2000 page intrusion and takeover of the health care

system in america by the federal government, which it could end up being. we're always glad to see the president back where he once worked, and we stand ready to sit down and meet with president if he has time and we would like to have the c-span cameras in when we do so. >> [inaudible] >> you would have to tell me when meaningful idea that is not a motherhood kind of thing we would all agree to. saying one idea of significant policy implications that would change the bill that went to the health committee or finance committee that was accepted by the democrats. you cannot find one because i have been in all the debates and discussions.

>> you talk about opening up the meetings and letting c-span cameras in the room. you know as well as i do that to get things done, not that there is anything awful going on behind closed doors, but that is how deals are made in congress. that is how things are done in the senate. you know how long you -- you have been here long enough to know that as part of it. >> and i know you have been around here long enough to see the approval ratings of congress and washington. they're down 17%. i have not met somebody in the 17% or 18% category, certainly not in arizona. maybe we ought to do things different. the president committed to doing things differently, my friend. whether you are of the opinion that is the way business as usual is conducted, that is not the president committed to when he ran. maybe we should all just be so cynical that when politicians run for public office that they're really not going to do with a pledge to do. i don't think the american people deserve that and i don't

think, frankly, that is helpful to our system of government. >> can i just add one thing -- the only reason this bill is behind closed doors because they're trying to pass it with 60 democrats only. that is why it's behind closed doors. if this were a truly bipartisan measure, all that would not be necessary. they have crafted a bill that has no appeal to any republican. so they are left with trying to get every one of their ducks in a row and they are completely vulnerable to any senator who says you need to do this for my state and another who says you need to do this for my state. as senator mccain has pointed out repeatedly on the floor, all 100 senators would like to have the same opportunities if there are special fixes being put in for one state or another. >> when we talk about these deals, who is it that is left out of the deals?

the american people. they are the ones who are left out. example -- the deal the pharmaceuticals companies cut which was reported on the front page of several newspapers, that in return for their support of the legislation, the administration would oppose drug importation from canada, which prescription drug prices could be as much as 50% lower, and would oppose competition from medicare recipients by the pharmaceutical companies. so who got damaged by the deal? not the pharmaceutical people. the american people did. you will find when the details of every one of these detailed -- the details of every one of these things come out that those special interests did very well, but the american people did very poorly. >> [inaudible] there are a lot of republicans are co-sponsors of that bill.

do you think they will be with you on the floor? >> i have no idea, but i do know this -- the administration and farms of the companies are pulling out all the stops to try to stop legislation, which is clearly in the best interest of people who have to buy prescription drugs because they're much less expensive when they come from other countries such as canada. there is no way you can disprove that statement. there is evidence of it. they're pulling out all stops and we'll see who wins. the special interest -- the pharmaceutical companies -- and saw a thing the other day that are -- they're lobbyists is very well reimbursed. i think $1.7 million. there can to bet -- their campaign contributions and add their running, i have no idea how many millions of dollars and guess what, they are supporting this plan because they have done very well in this deal.

>> instead of creating a new bureaucracy -- is that called any appeal? >> [unintelligible] [inaudible] >> the reason for that is there is no interest in drafting a proposal that was in the political middle. one year ago, the president looked at the situation and seven sitting on a 70% approval rating, i have a big margin in the house and on my way to getting 60 votes in the senate. we don't need the republicans. they decided that it was clear as discussions with don in the finance committee that republicans could not in good conscience support. they are left with what senator mccain has just described. the only way they can get to 60

as with all the deal making. had they chosen to go down the middle, a lot of these special interests would have been disarmed. by a truly bipartisan bill. we could have done something we have been recommending from the very beginning -- go step-by- step to fix the problems that deal with costs, and all that has been lost in this desire to restructure, through this 20074 page bill, one sixth of our economy. thank you, everyone. >> said republicans on capitol hill a short time ago. as we look live now at the senate floor, with work continuing on as this -- on this sunday. there are two men and boats and the immediate agenda. right now, a vote on the democratic senator from arkansas, the amendment we expected to take place yesterday, limiting insurance

industry tax-deductible salaries to the same amount the president makes, which is currently $400,000. 60 votes are needed to pass. the senator from nevada has an amendment limiting these attorneys can collect in medical malpractice lawsuits. you can see live coverage of the debate on c-span2. as the senate debate continues on health care, you can visit c- span's health-care hub. you can watch a video on demand for the senate and house floors. it is online at c-span.org. earlier this week, president obama announced his plan to send an additional 30,000 troops to afghanistan. now afghanistan's ambassador to the u.s. talks about the future of his country. this last about an hour. have not seen in a long time.

i am the founder and director of the center on politics at johns hopkins. this is the sponsor of the event today along with our partners, "the financial times." we have a reporter from the paper and a correspondent from ft. we have been doing this for the past several years and we have the chief of the afghan division at the voice of america. last year we hosted quite a few of the presidential candidates and were out in denver at the democratic convention and backed president obama. we met him before he became president. we were having a breakfast with madeleine albright.

next year we will be having -- we will be covering most of the congressional senate races, so we hope to have quite a few candidates here. we also have quite a few prime minister's and foreign ministers speak in the past. for jan. it looks like we will have the governor of mississippi. -- for january will have a governor of mississippi speak and it running. -- and mitt romney speak as well. it you want to take a look at our center on politics, we have three web sites. one is transatlantic

magazine.org. we also did one of the first on- line magazines on barack obama. it is called america's 44th president. the white house told people to look at our website. you will find barack obama on everything from afghanistan, which is where it starts, on other -- to other foreign policy issues. i try to write a blog once a week, and i also write regularly for the "huffington post." our honored guest is the afghanistan ambassador to the united states. he will be looking ahead at what will happen in afghanistan. earlier this week most of you

saw president obama say that there will be a 30,000 additional troops going into afghanistan. today we learned that nato has promised 7000 more troops, so that is 37,000 more troops. that will be the total -- the total will be over 100,000 troops. the ambassador, before being elected in 2003, worked for president karzai as his press secretary and director of international relations. when he is not being the ambassador to the u.s., he is also an ambassador to mexico, brazil and argentina. he was schooled in kabul and received his mba at golden gate

university in san francisco and was a lawyer for several prominent law firms. after 9/11 he went back to afghanistan to help rebuild the country. we are very privileged to have him here today. i would like to announce the ambassador. [applause] >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. thank you, panelists and for the kind introduction. it is great being back here. i am grateful for the center on politics and foreign relations at johns hopkins university for providing me this opportunity in this important week of discussion about the afghan government on the new strategy being adopted by president obama.

we generally welcome president obama's new strategy and new commitment in resources, especially military resources for afghanistan. we are especially grateful for the additional resources to build our institutions and afghanistan, as well as resources to enhance the capacity of the afghan government to deliver sources -- to deliver services. we welcome the renewed attention to the agricultural sector and we are grateful for general mcchrystal's approach for making the protection of the afghan people the most important pillar of the strategy. we agree with president obama that we must reverse the momentum of the taliban.

we should deny them access to major metropolitan centers and populated areas and work with pakistan to destroy all safe havens, including those operating against afghanistan, nato and u.s. forces. the surge is needed to provide time and space for afghanistan to build its own security forces. we in afghanistan are committed to do our part to see that the new strategy succeeds, and for su -- for us to take the responsibility. i admire president obama for standing tall and emphasizing that this country was built on the values of freedom and human

rights. and the u.s. will stand up for those struggling to achieve such values. allow me also to convey my gratitude to all those soldiers a -- soldiers and afghan forces fighting and dying. they are true heroes. there is a lot of debate about the necessity to be in afghanistan, but those fighting in afghanistan, and i have met many of them, they are true heroes. they are fighting to make the world a safer place for our children. i also welcome the deployment of additional troops and am grateful for support their families are providing for

preserving safety and stability in the region. i would like to give you my position on some of the key issues of the new strategy. i will try to answer some questions being raised repeatedly. the most important item is that we fully support president obama's planned to transition the responsibility of taking over the security matters in afghanistan on a gradual basis. the responsible drawdown of the combat troops may start in 18 months. we are ready to begin to take the responsibility ourselves. there are many regional factors

that will impact the u.s. presence and the drawdown of the forces. we are ready to take the full responsibility of the security in afghanistan. president karzai indicated we will take this in a province by province basis. today we are in charge of the security of kabul province, this is where almost one fourth of the population is living. we are practically in charge of the security in many other provinces in northern and central afghanistan, where some nato troops are operating. we are planning on taking the lead on the military operations within three years. in five years we should be able to take the responsibility of the security throughout the country.

we think the best exit strategy for the u.s. is success. to succeed is the best strategy for us and the united states. for us and the united states. we will be we understand dying in fighting for afghanistan is our responsibility. we are ready to take this responsibility. therefore, for a smooth transfer, we are asking for the establishment of a joint security consultation group with u.s. and nato. some of the initial consultation about that matter is already started. the afghan national army is already fighting alongside your forces. there is hardly any operation today in afghanistan anywhere that has been conducted without the presence of the afghan security forces, national army,

or forces. they are not strong enough, an average of three police officers are dying in afghanistan while dying for the safety and security of afghanistan. three police officers a day. that responsibility will increase once we acquire baker -- greater capacity and abilities. we acquired better capabilities. there is no shortage of resources or skills . we will get additional resources to accommodate this strengthening of security forces. to give you an example, if we look at the current number of trainers needed, it is surprising how short the number is. we need almost 2375 police

teams. only 1050 have been deployed. the same thing with the operation teams, only 55% are filled. with additional troops some vacancies will be filled. we appreciate nato countries and willingness -- we appreciate nato countries willingness to participate. i think instead of pushing too hard for additional troops for those countries, we should try to seek synergies between different degrees of capability that our partners are bringing to the table. ask them to do what they can do the best.

they can help with sending trainers or equipment, particularly the heavy artillery, helicopters, transport airlift for our forces are in demand. many afghans like myself who speak german and french. europe can play an important role in bringing a large number of students to europe to build the country for the institutions right now. there are many other ways nato countries can contribute. in order to further enhance the cooperation, three important things are under way in the upcoming months. there will be a conference in

london focus on enhancing security that will take place in late january. there will be a conference in kabul that will focus on finalizing and working two new compacts. it will set forth mutual expectations and responsibilities between the afghan government and international partners. a second compact between the afghan government and the people to recommit the government to provide better governance, fight corruption and improve the life of the afghan people. a third conference could take place in tokyo to focus on deficiencies and funding. we heard clearly your message

about the need to improve the government's and -- to improve the governmentnance. if our government was functioning there would not have been [unintelligible] there would have been no taliban and no international efforts to rebuild afghanistan. therefore, improving the government is our responsibility. the government of afghanistan is committed to taking measures to fight corruption and improve the government. the president said that individuals involved in corruption will not have a place in the government. 600 officials have been arrested lately, and many are high-

ranking officials. we are improving the quality of the chief of police and others. we will emphasize the appointment based on merit. and fighting narcotics which funds large-scale corruption is also part of on priority in fighting terrorism and corruption. -- also part of our priority. to fight corruption we need three things, political will, strong legal institutions and improved laws. the political will is becoming much stronger. the laws are being changed. to give an example, the

constitution requires a member of the cabinet register their property, but then the penal code does not provide a penalty if they do not do so. these laws are being changed. in the past we appointed once a prominent attorney general and hoped he would deal with this issue, but since he was just one person, he failed. corruption is a symptom of that government, not the cause of a bad government. one should note that what we are facing in afghanistan is not just bad government, it is absence of government and weak government.

in many parts of afghanistan the government is not present. the institutions are week to begin with, so we welcome president obama's plan for the surge. with all due respect to media's right to report selectively and sometimes irresponsibly, we also have to go to the afghan people on what do they think about the concept of corruption and what is the perception among afghan people? according to a recent survey, 36% of afghans think security is the biggest problem in their life.

35% say unemployment, and 17% say corruption. the order is very important. it is very important to improve government but equally important to improve security and provide jobs. as far as the support for the afghan government, the same survey indicates 71% support the performance of the afghan government. despite all the shortfall in the limitations on our resources, 91% of afghans support the performance of the afghan national army. another issue being raised about the concern of where this money is going to, we are ready to be

fully accountable for the international funding that is being channelled through the afghan government. 20% of the funding is channeled through the afghan government. it is usually through the afghan trust fund. and we are asking our partners to change some of the traditional ways they are spending their money. to strengthen the institution of the afghan government we would like to see the budget being allocated to afghanistan increased to 40% by next year. there has been talk about direct support for qualified institutions and officials as part of the new strategy. this is very much welcomed. i would encourage institutions to perform better.

we have always been in favor of benchmarks and deadlines that pushes institutions to perform better, but the focus should be on developing capacity, not replacing capacity. to bypass the government for ignoring the constitution is not a sustainable when of development. -- to bypass the government or ignore the constitution is not a sustainable way of development. this will lead to failure. that partnership must be strengthened. greater transparency on the part of our major donors will help us fight corruption in afghanistan because afghan people would like to know --

sometimes they don't see much tangible results. we have the same interests you have, to make sure every dollar has been spent in the most effective way. therefore, we are seeking the establishment of a joint economic council to work on these issues jointly. another very important pillar of the new strategy is reintegration with the taliban. it is very much welcomed by the afghan government. this same survey indicates 71% of advanced support the efforts of the afghan government. these efforts have been underway since 2004.

they have received limited resources, but we welcome this approach. we think in order to reduce confusion, the best conduit's to carry out this is the institutions of the afghan government. in the past there were reports that certain provinces have established direct contact and created confusion. we think the best conduit should be the afghan government. the question i have been asked frequently, why should our soldiers die for your government?

first those soldiers are dying to make europe and the united states they are not dying for the afghan government. you came to afghanistan because you are attacked. from bases better operating in afghanistan, by al qaeda. we're grateful for the fact that they are there and helping us out in the meantime. they are not there to fight. therefore, the afghan people are your partner. they are offering partnership. let's stay focused on what the mission is. your mission is to destroy,

distract, and feet al qaeda. and, prevent the return of taliban and help the afghan people. your presence is welcome and demanded. demanded. a lot will the same question has been asked -- why are we in afghanistan? frankly, i am surprised how quickly people will go back to the mindset of september 10th. you are in afghanistan, as i mentioned, because you were attacked, because of 9/11. this is truly america's war -- to disrupt, dismantle, and

destroy al qaeda. this is a nato's battle for regional stability and europe's security. this is our struggle to stay alive in a very difficult part of the world. prisons in afghanistan's -- presence in afghanistan has prevented attacks on u.s. soil and we hope that happens neither here, there, or any country, including afghanistan. but you are in afghanistan to provide security only the street -- on the streets of new york and the benefit of prisons in afghanistan is mutual. is in the best mutual interest of afghanistan and the united states to be with us and fight a brittle and me in afghanistan. interest to fight a bharal enemy in afghanistan.

-- to fight a brittle enemy in afghanistan. one cannot separate this from stability or lack of stability in pakistan, in mission test nuclear capabilities. it has become an epicenter lately. other neighbors of afghanistan have nuclear ambitions. your presence is beneficial for both of us. i know that being in afghanistan is dangerous. so many precious lives of americans have been lost and they are irreplaceable. but not being in afghanistan is equally dangerous. as president obama has said, the historic strength of the united states is to end wars and to prevent conflicts.

security aside, you have improved the life by your presence. hundreds of children are going back to school. and refugees have returned back to afghanistan. we have seen drastic changes. it is all due to your assistance, support, and presence. what is success in afghanistan? success in afghanistan is protecting the united states by building the security institutions of afghanistan, to prevent a return of the taliban and al qaeda to the region. it is a difficult neighborhood of the world. i know that we're losing public support for the mission in afghanistan. why is that? it is a tough mission.

it is a difficult or. we are facing april enemy. young men and women are dying. -- we're facing a brutal enemy. why these precious lives are being lost and how to prevent major security incidents here in europe. leadership's is not above falling public opinion. it is about changing public opinion, especially when it comes to the issue of security and war. an important question has been asked, who is our partner in afghanistan? the afghan people. they are your partner. the afghan government is providing this partnership to you continuously and the government should be treated as

such. treated as a partner. -- treat it as a partner. quick notes -- i do not want to run out of time. on pakistan, we're happy to report we're deepening our relationship@@@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ >> we welcome president obama's reference to dealing with the safe havens of high-level terrorist to locations are known and whose intentions are clear. we would like the government of pakistan to expand their operation interrogating some of the leadership of the taliban who are working to kill american

and nato forces in afghanistan. overall, success is in our reach. the goals in afghanistan are very modest. what has been accomplished so far, despite minor setbacks, is drastic. we have delivered basic health- care services to 85% of the afghans do to u.s. support and assistance. have to develop health care services due to your support and assistance. 7 million children are going back to school. 40% or girls. a major accomplishment. -- 40% or girls. -- 40% are girls. 78% think democracy is the best type of government. there has been discussion back and forth. are we imposing democracy on afghanistan? no, we are not.

and the way to do this is to get advice to the afghan people. if democracy means having not having a terrorist going to bed at home or having an opportunity to send their daughters to school with their spouses t, ths is what every human being deserves. time is crucial. we're grateful for the decision been made and for speedy implementation. we look for the support of the congress to fund this. we are familiar with the economic crisis. we hope that the necessary funding will be in place for this mission to store. we can jointly accomplished this mission. there is more reason to think we will not be able to defeat a

brutal enemy like the taliban. thank you very much. " the ambassador has agreed to take some question. i will ask the first one. we have a lot of questions. i will go back to the question i asked a few members of the bush administration. president bush said will bring osama bin laden to justice. that was 2001. why cannot the strongest army in the nine states, may know, and the afghan army find an individual supposedly finding in a cave somewhere? will we ever find osama bin laden and bring him to justice? >> if he was in afghanistan by now, we would have certainly found him. our armies are in 41 countries. if he were in afghanistan, he

board have been found. i do not think he is in a cave. he needs dialysis and connectivity with the rest of the network of al qaeda. he is most probably in a major metropolitan center and hiding or living in an varmint them living in a cave. he is not in afghanistan. there is nothing that will prevent any one of bust to find him if he is in afghanistan. >> its c and pakistan? >> that is a very good guess. -- is he in pakistan? >> thank you very much. i thought that was interesting. there is a reasonable argument that success depends much more on many more packages than just the 30,000 troops.

it depends on building governance and on pakistan. all of those may be more important than the 30,000 troops. i would like to ask you about the buildup of the army. the buildup of the army. the u.s. has spent $40 billion people you talk about -- the national army been present in much of the company, but senator carl levin a few days ago said the ratio is for nato for everyone national afghan army. i think the u.s. has said less than one-third of the net -- the national afghan army is less -- is able to fight on its own.

given the u.s. has given such enormous amounts of money over the last few years and there is such little time before july, 2011, why haven't you done better and what prospect have got of success? better? but prospects you have for success? crust i am not sure about the $19 billion. i cannot tell you it is exactly $19 billion. that money has not been given to the defense of afghanistan. the money has been spent directly by our partners. the reason we are not fair, first, the approach was not proper. we wanted to have an army of at least 200,000. everyone said, this is too much. you cannot have this kind of army. how are you going to pay for it? so they put a ceiling on it. for a country bigger than iraq,

and more complicated than iraq. in this condition, the 35,000 was extremely unreasonable. the training that took place was basic. soldiers were fighting with recycled ak-47's. up till recently, the army was fighting with old ak-47's. there was no nato equipment. just recently they switched to nato guns. the national army does not have airlift capabilities. same thing with the police force. the concept of the league nation was created. germany is on that and is doing that. that is fine.

you don't have to worry about it. the resources were limited. the approach was not appropriate. trading afghan forces with batons and pistols while the taliban is coming with rocket launchers. the job of the police officer is not to issue a parking citation for a car bomb. his job is to stay alive at first. the approach was not proper. the resources were limited. the ceilings were on realistic. 35,000 was raised recently. there is no shortage of manpower. pay them adequately. thousands will and list. -- thousands will enlist. they were recruiting police officers.

it was increased. it was not enough. a cooked in afghanistan makes $3. a driver makes $500. how do you expect people will show up if you're paying that little? it is an expense you have to pay. u.s. soldiers cost $1 million a year. if the cost of not doing that is a lot more, it means having more of your troops, british, american, and other troops being in afghanistan, it is politically not sustainable. we're there to do this. >> mr. ambassador, the 30,000 additional troops will deploy at the fastest pace possible. they can target the insurgency and the key population centers

and the key population centers in >> so far, in the past eight years, we had some glitches with supplying troops in afghanistan here and there. overall, there is much better a degree of cooperation both in the south and north by our neighbors to accommodate the transfer and supply of u.s. troops, things are improving even in northern afghanistan to do this. the infrastructure, a lot of heavy activity is going on in afghanistan. the airport is probably one of the busiest airports in the world, militarily. work is underway and there has been proper planning to make sure the troops are properly accommodated. they will not go in one big number, it will be a gradual deployment. >> we're going to open up for

the ambassador. . can open it up for about 10 or 15 minutes. >> amy kaslow. i direct the work force economy initiative. you talked about a lot of ways to improve the credibility of the government. the government. into corruption, governments staggering governmeunemployment. tell us more about this corporation your hoping to achieve, what you hope to accomplish on the ground in terms of job generation. >> very good question. in the name of the joint economic corporation is to make sure overall as a nation are

recognized as part of our efforts. in different parts of afghanistan, travels -- it varies very much. it is different in one place compared to another. the aim of the council is to put a lot of focus first and foremost on agriculture. this is an area that has received little attention. we're putting more attention on that ourself. other areas that could create jobs and wealth in afghanistan are mining, seeking more investment in mining will create large-scale jobs and also provide for the sustainability of the economy of afghanistan in. the council will try to put a strategic focus on creating jobs and creating a sustainable

economy in afghanistan. >> stanley? >> my question concerns iran. after 911, all the reports were that iran very helpful. in the last few months, i have been reading scattered accounts coupled iranian weapons showing up. i of seen those accounts disputed. my question is, how credible of these reports? how'd you view the policy of iran toward afghanistan in general? >> thank you very much. the policy is complicated. on one hand, they do not want to seek the return of taliban. they understand long-term historical linguistic and religious ties. they are playing a constructive

role as far as building a roads, help with education, and assisting the afghan government. because of the tension that exists, they are keeping destructive options active. if there is a complication of relation between iran and washington, we would be paying a price. they are playing both constructive and a destructive role in afghanistan. we would like to be more constructive. we would be better off if iran continued to be constructive. we have been asked very clearly, our friends, and to leave their differences out of afghanistan. it would serve the best interests. the role they are playing is to fall. you are right with the increased

tension. -- the role is to wofold. they remind us that other options in afghanistan. >> thank you. >> give your name. >> i am the correspondent from spain. you look at the map of afghanistan. it is very different from the it is very different from the soviet union. is there a security problem in afghanistan? >> the pashtuns are being recruited and used. there is no question they are

dying. uns being used and recruited. they're all not terrorists. they are the prime victims of that. most of the killing, most of the fighting takes place in those areas of afghanistan and pakistan. there have been grievances in the past on the part of the pashtuns. there are more vulnerable to terrorism. that includes elle lack of delivery of services on both parts of the border -- that includes a lack of delivery and services on both parts of the border. there's not an ethnic nature to it. how can a man because of some ethnic problem, instead of trying to improve his life and participate in building his

community will where a suicide belt and go into a mosque full of other pashtuns on a friday and go and kill himself? how can we explain that, that young men will go into a mosque or market in an hour full of women, mostly christian women, and explode himself backs which have to find out why they had been recruited. ethnicity does not play a role there. it is a lack of services and other historic grievances. >> thank you. i am from gannett. the president talked about an 18-month limit. you said three to five years. is he being realistic?

first, he said it will begin in three months. it was a responsible drawdown. if you put it all in context, we will see the drawdown will not be actually at the day. conditions should be re- evaluated. the main objective is really to defeat the enemy. if we accomplish that sooner than 18 months, we should do it. but i think overall, considering the current security threats, the 18-month time frame is realistic. if other things do not change in the region, will be fully ready to take responsibility from those u.s. troops that will be leaving afghanistan.

>> question from back there. >> yes, hi. terrance smith. there is a lot of rhetoric and the u.s. side about not making the same mistakes that were made when the u.s. was involved in the late 1980's. robert gates said yesterday. what extent is the u.s. actually in vault are committed to non-military advancements in afghanistan? you mentioned girls going back to school. not something we're doing other than security gains. >> a lot of focus has been made of the military part of the new strategy, the number of the troupe, drawdown, update. this is a comprehensive approach on insuring long-term partnership between afghanistan and the united states.

you mentioned creating jobs and hope and opportunity as the most sustainable way of fighting in stabilizing afghanistan. we have been seeking a long-term partnership with the united states. this is the best hope the afghan people have. this is a lot more today, a willingness to focus on the area of enhancing this kind of relationship. the number of exchanges is increasing. students more -- more students coming year. more people-to-people exchanges. it enhances mutual understanding. these are under way. i hope that the economic crisis and the difficulties in this country will allow the united states to further deliver on promises that are being made on

the new strategy. we're asking also of the support of the u.s. congress overall, not just to focus on the military expansion. >> i have one more question. we defeated the taliban fairly quickly after 9/11. why didn't they state defeated? >> we did not defeat the taliban. we pushed them aside. we pushed them into the countryside into pakistan. and then we did not stay focused on afghanistan. there were other big wars and crises. had we stayed focused on afghanistan and start building the security institutions on time, there would not have been a need for additional u.s. troops at this time. of course, the issue of the

centuries of the taliban on the other side of the border remain unchallenged. they are still able to receive political, ideological, and financial support from bases on the other side of the border. >> i have one more question. we have heard an awful lot about what went wrong over the last few years. violence has increased since 2005 every year. u.s. military says the taliban is increasing their control. you talked about efforts began in 2004. president karzai talked-about the willingness to enter into talks. >> the reason is that the efforts of the afghan government

since 2004 were not taken seriously by the rest of the world. the second reason is that there was -- the consolation of the taliban has three components to it. first, it is not -- first, you were dealing with the ideological leadership of the taliban about 10%. they are not affiliated with al qaeda. it goes a long way. it started against the resistance against the soviets. the 10% has to be eliminated in a military matter. >> the president said he was willing to talk. one would assumed he was in the 10%. >> it is one of those 10%, but

there is a symbolic significance. if you start talking, that may change a lot. it has to be dealt with in a military matter. the remaining percentage are malicioutias who have been antagonized because of lack of proper governance and paramilitary operations and what is going on in the south. that 10% is the group that should be focused on in terms of engagement. the engagement is the geopolitical and financial to bring them over to us. the remaining 60% are unemployed that have been promised paradise or $300 fighting. becker is neither a military or political.

we have to give jobs and a sense of assurance that if you go back to afghanistan, you'll not be killed or sent to jail. we have coordination with our friends. we have individual commanders of nato or u.s. agencies or military has contacted them and has created some confusion. so therefore, it is much better to put a clearer structure and to try to do it in a very coordinated way. coordinated way. >> mr. ambassador, i listened >> education of women will change things in afghanistan. he said his book was becoming mandatory. he said three things. americans need to learn to listen, respect, and build a

relationship. does mr. morton ssen of it right? >> yes, it is mutual. to listen, to respect, and to understand is the most fundamental core. when you hear slogans about afghanistan reconstruction, if you listen carefully, it is not the right approach. the reconstruction should not have an afghan face. done by afghan hands. that is the way to build it. it is about winning the hearts and minds. that is better than a charity operation where you are giving candy to people. -- we are winning the hearts and mind. we're trying to win your heart

and mind. no. building trust and confidence. treating the others as your partner. all of that, come to an understanding come up trusting and engaging. thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] talk about

>> the u.s. senate is still in session debating health care. earlier today, the majority leader announced the senate would be debating and possibly voting on an abortion amendment tomorrow. today, they rejected a limit on the deductibility of health insurance and get rid executive. there is live senate coverage on c-span 2. tonight, the best-selling author of " the tipping point" talks about his latest book. that is it 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. british prime minister gordon brown talks about president obama's recent speech on afghanistan and the bridges mission there. -- and the british mission there. >> a rally was held on saturday

near the federal courthouse protesting the decision to hold civilian trials there for alleged 9/11 terrorist conspirators. among the speakers were brian dennehy and radio host steve malzberg. you will also hear from relatives and survivors. the event was organized by the "never forget" coalition. this is about one hour and 45 minutes. >> let us pray. gracious and loving god, this is the time and the place to celebrate the sacred season of christmas, hanukkah, ramadan,

pkwanzaa, and other religious activities. it is a time to come to celebrate the gift of life and love and families. lord god, this is not the time and place to have a trial here. this is a time of understanding why an act of war was taken against america. we're here to ask the authorities to make this a military trial. that is the time and place for it. not here. give us the peace and strength to continue forward on the road to salvation. amen. god bless you and god bless america.

>> i have interviewed a lot of people over the years. i cannot think of anyone i admire and respect within our first speaker today. deborah berlingame is the sister of chic berlingame. she has been working since that date to bring justice in every possible way. she is the co-founder of 9/11 families, the museum and memorial foundation at the world trade center, and a founding director of keep america safe. you can read her articles in the wall street journal and everywhere else. you see her on television and on the talk shows.

i have been graced with her presence on my talk show. she has been very instrumental in her testimony before congress. she has been a strong advocate of enforcing the patriot at, the surveillance program. she has been instrumental in every single issue that we care about. . some of you may not know that she is a former producer at court tv rashid covered dozens of legal proceedings ranging from the o.j. simpson trial, the clinton and peach and hearings, and the microsoft hearings. you know how she feels about what is about to take place at the courthouse. we can stop it. here is our leader, debra berlingame. >> are we mad or not?

let me tell you something. he is right. that tall building is the federal courthouse at our attorney general wants to bring an unrepentant were criminal, protected by our own military, surrounded by our own police officers and federal marshals, to protect him from you. as to give him a stage in the federal courthouse. -- he wants to give him a stage in the federal courthouse. we're here to say that is not going to happen. as we stand here today, american women in uniform for fighting al qaeda and their sympathizers on fronts all over the world. soon, 3000 more of our fellow

citizens will be deployed into that fight. in the midst of war, the obama administration wants to put on a show trial on the site of al qaeda's bloodiest battle against this country. the citizens of this country need to understand that this trial will not happen soon. not this year, not next year, or the year after that. it is not just because we do not want it to happen at this courthouse. it is because this trial has to start from day one in a federal civil system. it will take three years to prepare this case for trial. 9/11 family members and first responders to think that khalid sheikh mohammed and his cohorts

will be seated in front of the jury panel soon need to know that will not happen. there will be hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence that federal prosecutors will have to come through. one of the things they will be doing is coming through it to hand our intelligence secrets to the defense. you need to know that the military prosecutors have spent three years beginning this ready for trial. we were about to end it when these men decided they wanted to plead guilty. they are worried that the parents of some of these victims will not be alive when justice finally occurs. it will take that long in the civil, federal court. on the morning of 9/11, it took hijackers 12 minutes to take

control of the cockpit of my brothers airplane. it took six minutes for them to kill my brother and his co- pilot. six minutes in a closed cockpit is a very long time. i am not the sister of a victim. i am the sister of a fighter. [applause] we are not here today surrounded by a archer's courthouses to complain and moment what happened -- by our cherished courthouses to complain about what happened. we're here to prevent it from happening again. this perverted policy must be reversed. we know that they are going to use the court house to put our country on trial, to exalt in

the pain of the families, to disgrace the judge, to disgrace our country. this is not an ennobling plan. is not going to help our country in the eyes of the world. if you take one thing away from this today, take one message. do not get mad. get busy. this is the beginning of a national campaign. we're going to go out into the districts of every member of congress hiding behind their desks. we are going to out them. we are going to come after you. we're going to make sure -- [applause] we are going to make sure that you are put on notice. thank you very much. [applause] of

>> ladies and gentlemen, our next speaker is a retired 20- year decorated firefighter and survivor of the 9/11 attacks on the world trade center. he was the first responder to the 1993 terrorist attack on the world trade center. he is a veteran of the new york search and rescue task force that responded to the 1995 terrorist attack on the alfred murrow federal building in oklahoma city. he has worked at all levels of government in the security field, including the u.s. department of health and human services and the governor's office in the state of rhode island. along with his firefighter brother, chris, he owns the hefpopular fdnu website.

ladies and gentlemen, tim brown. [applause] than>> the key. we are the backbone of america, right here. this is the backbone. we are the firefighters, police officers, construction workers, and united states military veterans from new york city. right here, these guys. [applause] it is our belief that the attack on the world trade center was an act of war. those who participated in that attack are war criminals. we do not agree that these murderous terrorists are

entitled to the same rights afforded to our nation's citizens under our constitution. these terrorists declared war on our city and our nation. the september 11 attack killed 343 new york city fire fighters , 37 port authority police officers, 23 new york city police officers, hundreds of construction workers, and thousands of other innocents. these murderers showed no mercy. they did not think twice about the rights of our families and friends when they planned this attack. attorney-general holder has suggested that we oppose prosecuting these men and that courthouse are afraid of khalid sheikh mohammed.

let me ask you something. do these guys look like they are afraid? i do not think so. that somehow we do not have the courage to face khalid sheikh mohammed. you do not think these guys will face him? these are men here. these are americans. how dare eric holder imply that we lack courage? courage is carrying on after watching your loved ones die, knowing that they burned to death, that they were crushed to death, or they jumped from 100 floors up. courage is carrying on even as we waited for something of our friends to bury. more than 1100 families are still waiting for something to barry. how dare the attorney general

suggest that we firefighters, police officers, construction workers, and military veterans who oppose this trial need to man up? how dare he suggest that we allow this in any of america to mock our brothers in the courthouse. there? let me refresh the attorney general on the meaning of courage. courage was going into the buildings that day, knowing we might not come out alive. courage was my best friend, capt. terry hatton, hugging me in the lobby of tower 1 telling me that he loved me and might never see me again as he went into the stairwell to save lives. i never saw him again. courage was digging for nine months on hands and knees,

breeding and toxic smoke, to find the ravaged remains a brother firefighters, police officers, citizen responders, and office workers. this was not summoned from false bravado. it sprang from an abiding love of our fellow human beings and a sense of obligation to them. eight years ago, all americans stood with us as we dug for our friends and loved ones. you stood with us as we bury them. we need all good americans to stand with us again as we fight this travesty. join us now at 911neverforget .us thank you. god bless and god bless america. [applause]

[chanting "usa"] >> we're going to bring you another man with a fire fighting background. peter eagan is a firefighter and served two tours in iraq. he is a 9/11 family member. he lost his father from rescue company no. 3. he is here to make a very special introduction. peter eagan. [applause]

>> i would like to thank everyone for coming out here. the united states constitution is about a new and ambitious nation seeking freedom, liberty, and endless possibilities. the united states constitution was written by americans and for americans. it was intended for the protection of the nation and its people. it is a set of guidelines that we are expected to uphold. i say "week," because i am speaking as we the people. -- i say "we,"because i am

speaking as we the people. this is an outrage. attorney general colder is granting enemy combatants were now called "and privileged in any combatants -- unprivileged enemy combatants"a trial in the united states of america. this has never been done before. why are we starting now? what is the benefit of this? this administration has never explained any of this. what i got out of the hearing last month was that for some reason, the killing of nearly 3000 americans, mostly civilians, rated in article 3 hearing. the cole bombing raided a

military commission. it was also an act of aggression from terrorists. it should not make a difference who the enemy kills. terrorists should the child in a military commission court. they planned, aided, and oversaw the attacks of september 11, 2001. this was a pre-emptive strike on the united states. they were at war with us. they went to flight schools. the device address of hijackings. they steered planes into planned targets and slammed them into this nation. this is an act of war. with an act of war, there are rules that go back beyond any memory. this nation has tried and convicted unprivileged

combatants who do not follow the rules. the term means an individual other than a privileged belligerent has engaged in hostilities against the united states or its coalition partners, supported hostilities against united states or its partners, or was a part of al qaeda at the time of the alleged offense under this chapter. attorney-general colholder told us not to be afraid of khalid sheikh mohammed. i am not afraid. i am not afraid of this terrorist or any other that as a marine, i have seen that kind on the battlefield. i will verify that they are afraid of us. they fear us on the battlefield

because they know they are no match for our military. they fear that we will bring the fight to their doorstep and hit them before they can hit us. america is not afraid. we are a strong nation only getting stronger. yet we fear i may have is the fact that if this case goes in that direction, he will be able to use our rights and privileges against the united states. that is our loss. the idea of the terrorist from a foreign agent that killed so many people to get to sit in a federal courtroom and have the rights of an american is appalling. my father donald regan, a firefighter, was killed on

september 11. he taught me pride, respect, and honor. he taught me to do the right thing and never give up. i am here today doing that. i was also recently told that attorney general holder does not have to listen to my opinion. we have elected officials in congress that are elected by our opinions. for someone to say that my opinion does not have an effect on attorney-general holder, that is like saying that none of your opinions have an effect on the attorney general holder. stand up. [crowd responding] >> our next speaker is the famed

actor who was a marine from 1959 to 1963. all i can say is once a marine, always a marine. semper fi. brian dennehy. >> i have been honored to give the opportunity to read a letter, a statement written by judea and ruth pearl, the parents of daniel pearl, the "wall street journal" reporter who was brutally murdered by terrorists in 2002. the terrorist who wielded the

sword is one of the men who will be tried over here. this was written december 5, 2009. "friends, on behalf of the daniel pearl foundation, we wish to join you today in a call to reverse attorney general. colder's scission -- to reverse attorney general. co-- to reverse attorney general eric holder's decision. our personal tragedy has come to symbolize the depths of inhumanity that has swept our planet in the 21st century and

the sense of urgency with which this planet is currently watching your rally in new york city. the rally may very well hold the key to the future of open society. we, who witnessed the darkest side of hell and have since spent every moment of our lives studying the anatomy of terror, we refuse to accept the strategy of normalization that this decision represents. i am going to repeat that sentence. "week refused to accept the strategy of normalization that attorney general holder's decision represents." terror is a crime against

society. it should not be tried in the same court as trendcrimes againt individuals or a particular country. let us make it perfectly clear. we're not concerned about the safety issues the this trial poses to new york city. we trust our law enforcement officers. nor are we concerned about the anguish of our children who will be seeing the memories and values of their loved ones mocked and ridiculed in that courtroom. they have known greater pain before. we are concerned about the millions of angry youngsters, among them potential terrorists, who will be watching this trial unfold on al jazeera tv and come to the realization that america has in fact caved in to al qaeda's demands for publicity.

the atrocity of 9/11, and the brutal murder of daniel pearl, are vivid reminders of jihadist cravings to dramatize their perceived grievances against the west. today, america has given these people and even louder megaphone in the best theater in the world. it has signaled to thousands of would-be terrorists that joining a kite or other terrorist organizations is one way to obtain that megaphone. we cannot accept the logic that terror has no country, that it cannot be defined, named, and fought with the same determination and creativity

that civilized society has fought other existential threats since the invention of gunpowder. these include high seas piracies, introduction of poison gas, and the threat of nuclear weapons. all were contained by creative changes in international law and the establishment of new, legal categories. the invention of the suicide belts is of no less a threat. terror is an ideology that elevates grievances above the norms of civilized society. like any epidemic of global dimension, it must be fought by attending to the distinct mechanisms that transmit and propagate the disease. in 2002, the international

community gave america a moral mandate to fight the new epidemic with all the necessary instruments, including a new court system, new legal regimes. the decision to try the arch symbols of terror in ordinary criminal courts using traditional legal instruments constitutes of the trail -- aid the trail -- it is of the ta bel of that mandate. please reclaim america's mandate to secure a brighter future for our troubled world. judea and ruth pearl, los angeles, california. thank you. god bless.

>> how about around of applause? brian dennehy drove many hours to be here today. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, an amazing couple of folks are going to talk to you next. laura manning is a former managing partner of cantor fitzgerald. on 9/11, she was catastrophically injured in the attacks on the world trade center. her survival and story has been chronicled in the press around the world. that includes all major publications. it is the subject of a new york times best-seller written by her husband.

she was chosen as one of "glamor"magazines outstanding women. her husband has been an editor and executive in the financial information industry. he is a partner at data corporation. he was the director of information, seals, and marketing. most recently, he was a partner at cantor fitzgerald. as a mentioned, he wrote the best seller, "love, greg and lauren." they have one heck of a story to tell. let's welcome greg and lauren manning. >> good afternoon. i am honored to join you to oppose the decision to bring khalid sheikh mohammed to new

york to face civilian trial. i am here before you because i witnessed my wife's remarkable battle to survive after she was injured in the 9/11 attacks. between us, we lost hundreds of colleagues. but we did not lose each other. for that reason, i have never felt comfortable being referred to as a member of the 9/11 family. i did not lose a loved one. my loved ones are still here. the decision by attorney general eric holder to bring khalid sheikh mohammed here has clarified my view. i understand now what being a member of a 9/11 family really means. it does not mean an inability to get over 9/11 or move on. it is not about reciting thousands of names one morning

every september. it means knowledge. it means that we know the impact the terrorism to have on a family and the cost of a casual attitude toward our enemies. we know we may forget the terrorists, but they never forget us. we have a visceral and immediate grasp of what it means to bring a mass murderer to his place of triumph, to grant him the due process he removed from his thousands of victims. we note that he will not care whether he is perceived as a coward or whether he is found guilty. he has gained a spectacular form. the leader of the 9/11 commission has said he does not know how much leeway the trial

judge will have to curb his speech when we say in his rambling and he calls a part of his defense. we know the governor is right when he said that mr. holder's decision to give him what he wants and revise a single piece of information can be spun into a web of violence to strike as at any time when we are most vulnerable. this is not an issue of right versus left. this is not republican nurses democrat. our anger at the decision is out of concern for the living. the time has come for the 9/11 families to deliver a message of common sense. i worked the wat the world trade center. i am sure i was not alone when i

looked out the window to see if the view was changing and the towers were falling to the ground with a loud noise. one of you did not change, i went back to work. -- when the view did not change, i went back to work. on that day, i was not in my office. i was lucky. the heroes rushed into the burning towers to rescue the afflicted. they died in action. to khalid sheikh mohammed, they were merely a bonus. his real target in new york where the people that worked on wall street. we did not wear uniforms. we were office workers, like hundreds of millions of americans. khalid sheikh mohammed was aiming at me. he was aiming at my wife. he was aiming at us. we honor all of the loss.

when we look at the collective memory, we see ourselves. we can never truly move on because we can never afford to be complacent about the real threat of terrorism. we know that deep down despite our heart rate, 9/11th could of been unimaginable worse. -- we know that deep down despite our corporaheartbreak, h could have been an unimaginably worse. if they had been better pilots, they might have succeeded. it sent to kill millions of innocent civilians is not a criminal act. it is an act of war. they are the definition of crimes against humanity.

if the targets are civilians, if someone were to send a nuclear weapon into an american city and kill millions of civilians, he will be earning a trial in civilian court under mr. ho lder's rationale. in that event, the city will be gone. that is why we know that the attorney general's decision is fundamentally wrong. it enhances the threat to all families. we know it is foolish and irresponsible to grant an unrepentant mass murderer the constitutional rights to due process when they will be used to disrupt the fight against terrorism and open up classified information. thousands are already dead because of khalid sheikh mohammed's choices.

we do not want to see thousands dead because of the attorney general's choices. we know the national security risk is not worth taking when the outcome will have no meaning to the defendant. there is nothing more certain than the guilty plea that khalid sheikh mohammed desired to make before a military tribunal. we should not be asked to spend millions of dollars, to waste millions of dollars to gamble on a guilty verdict just so we can say we did it our way. thank you. [applause] [chanting "usa"]

>> i entered the lobby of the north tower of the world trade center. an instant later, i was involved in a wall of fire and burned over most of my body. from west street, i watched the second airplane hit the south tower. at that moment, it was obvious it was another terrorist attack. i could not know then that a single and classified list of names have been provided to the defense during the trials of the 1993 world trade center bombers and delivered promptly to osama bin laden providing a feast of intelligence that eased the way for the attacks on 9/11. now attorney general. colder regions now attorney general -- the decision to hold a straw will launch a second round of terrorist trowels,

posing the same security risks it did eight years ago. i will let others debate the details and repercussions of his unprecedented choice to grant constitutional rights to enemy combatants who are captured on the battlefield. my position is simple. mr. holder told congress that if he failed to be convicted at trial, the u.s. would retain authority to detain him. the questions at the hearing made it clear that such an event would cause mr. mohammed to revert to the status he has today. we would all be back to square one with our resident enemy combatant. by any other definition, this makes the civilian trial a multimillion-dollar schrager. we should go back -- this makes

the civilian trial a multimillion-dollar charade. it has been just three weeks since the announcement, but we know what to expect. the man who sent the airplanes to kill my colleagues and light the flame that burned me will plead not guilty. they will make this trial their public relations exercise in global jihadist recruitment. our attorney general would force us to listen. my message is simple. we refuse to listen. i refuse to listen. we refuse to let new york become a leading platform for this terrorist mockery. we refuse to present another intelligence jackpot for our enemies that may cripple the

effects of our servicemen and women on the battlefields around the world. we refuse because we know that if we falter on the battlefield, we will face our enemies again in the streets. experience tells us that security risks posed by the trial are real. we have the case studies to prove it. we are being led back down the path that carried us to 9/11. the attorney general says he will take the heat if he is wrong. . .

>> i oppose the decision that rewards of a mass murderer, even as it replicates the circumstances that preceded the most terrible attack on our soil in the history of this country. if there is a compelling reason to do so, we should in dorset, but there is no history. there are no case studies to justify this rationale. we hear only trust me.

the attorney general is greeting and historical precedent out of all cloth as a risk to our city, to our nation. he tells us we should not cower before the enemy. we can our only when we grant our enemy constitutional rights to demonstrate in his words that we will enable every forum possible to hold the terrorists accountable for their actions. mr. holder tells us not to be scared. indeed, it takes a brave person to make a difficult decision. it takes a brave person to recognize and to change your wrong decision before the eyes of the world. mr. holder, you have a choice -- we must find the courage, you must find the courage to make the right one before it is too late. thank you. [applause]

>> can you hear me? are you angry? is this a bad decision? are we going to fight this? are you going to go to your congressman, to your local offices, and are you going to do what you need to do to change this? i in the executive director of the cantor fitzgerald release fund and the euro brokers release fund. we are the largest group of victims of 9/11. my brother lost his life that day.

the word lost is wrong. 658 of our loved ones, mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, sisters, brothers, colleagues and friends were murdered. they were murdered by the terrorists, khalid sheikh mohammed, and we do not want him and his fellow terrorists tried in that building. we are not the only victims. the people who live and work in new york city are victims also.

the people who live and work in the united states of america are victims also. we are tired of being victims. we need to tell eric holder that we will be victims no more. [applause] no more.

we are united with the firefighters and police officers and the military. anybody tells you civilians are not part of this are not telling you the truth. 9/11 families stand united against the decision to try these terrorists in new york's federal court. you can always find a handful of people in 3000 families who disagree, but we -- those are not the majority and last time i looked, this was still a democracy.

help us tell our government that the majority rules and what the majority wants, is these trials out of new york's federal courts. go tell your congressman, go to your local offices, get your friends to do it also, and let's change this decision now. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, i direct your attention to thejumbotron. we have a video montage of eric holder. >> can you give me a case in united states history where an enemy combatants caught on the

battlefield was tried in civilian court? >> i would have to look at that. the determination -- >> we are making history here. i will answer that for you. the answer is no. why would you take him someplace different than ksm? >> that might be the case. >> does it matter if you use the law enforcement theory or the enemy combat in theory in terms of how the case would be handled? if we captured osama bin laden tomorrow, would he be entitled to miranda warnings at the moment of capture? >> that all depends. >> it does not depend. if you are going to prosecute anybody in civilian court, our law is clear that the moment

custodial interrogations occurs, the defendants, the criminal defendant is entitled to a lawyer and to be informed of their rights to remain silent. the big problem have is you are decriminalizing the war. if we caught osama bin laden tomorrow, we could not turn over to the cia, fbi, for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now we are saying he is subject to criminal court in the united states and you are confusing people fighting this war. what did you tell the military commanders to capture them? would you tell them a must read them his right and give him a liar? if you did not, would you jeopardize the prosecution in a federal court. >> you have repeatedly said your decision to try khalid sheikh mohammed in our free courts is because that is where you have the best chance to prosecute, the senate -- the chances of

success are enhanced in our free court and you have access to all the evidence and you are a better position to judge than those who are ignorant of the evidence. how could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when khalid sheikh mohammed has already asked to plead guilty before a military commission asked to be executed? how could you be more likely to get a conviction in an article record than that? >> senator, you are dealing with -- >> are you concerned that a judge say you made an election to try these terrorists as a criminal and you are bound by that election and you cannot go back and revert to the laws of war? >> i am not. we cannot indefinitely detained somebody, but you can certainly

detain somebody for lawful reasons. >> so military commissions are a legitimate way is starkly that other nations have used as well as the united states to try people who violated the rules of war, is that right? >> that is correct. and when appropriate, i will make use of those commissions. >> i want to tell you that i think this is causing quite a bit of concern. i see today that the governor of new jersey who chairs the 9/11 commission says he thinks this is a mistake, that it will provide khalid sheikh mohammed a position to be a martyr and hero among al qaeda sympathizers are on the world. i would know -- i would note that the attorney under president clinton said it would take three years to try these cases. the decision has been strongly criticized, as you know, by rudy

guiliani, who was mayor of new york when the attack occurred, also served as associate attorney general and was a federal prosecutor himself and united states attorney in manhattan. i take his views seriously. i served under did -- i served under him when he was associate attorney general and he has complained about the former attorney general -- he has also criticized his decision. i don't think the american people are overreacting. i don't think they're acting fearfully. i think they think this is war and the decision you have made to try these cases in federal court represents a policy or political decision, wouldn't you agree? >> no. >> its a policy decision, at least, is it not? >> it was a decision that is case-driven and based on the evidence. >> with regard to the specific

decision you made, i've noticed you've referred to thecole and other case in which a military person was killed. but is it not true that on 9/11, the pentagon, the symbol -- the center of our defense establish -- defense establishment was directly attacked the people who declared war on us. >> there is no question that is true. it's one of the factors i considered in making this determination. the number of people who were killed on 9/11 were largely civilians, though there was a very grievous and heinous act that occurred at the pentagon. but because of the fact that this was an act that occurred upon our shores, with a victim population that was largely civilian, among other things, including the admissibility and my desire to ensure certain

evidence would be admitted. it was my determination that bringing the case in an article 3 court made the most sense. >> sir, the military personnel were killed on 9/11, they attacked our pentagon, and i don't think we should give a preference to military commission trials simply because of the enemy attacked civilian peoples rather than military people. >> i think you get the idea. can you believe this man is attorney general of the united states of america? god help us. listen, our next speaker is a man who was just amazing. he is a former federal prosecutor. he helped prosecute the blind shake -- the blind sheik.

you read him as a contributing editor to "national review" and cochairs the joint project of the national review institute where he is a senior fellow. his book is " the willful blindness -- a memoir of the jihad is a must read. he is my friend and he is brilliant, and mccarthy. -- andy mccarthy. >> we heard the attorney general, does that make sense to everyone now? we are back here because he thinks it's a crime and we know it is a war. we're back here in this spot where they declared war against

us 16 years ago. when they did -- when they declared war with us, they were using bombs and we answered with subpoenas. they attacked and we indicted. we brought them to that building where they could have a jury, a trial before a jury of their peers. now they want to give khalid sheikh mohammed a trial before a jury of his peers. when i looked out of my fellow new yorkers, i know khalid sheikh mohammed see 'speers. i see khalid sheikh mohammed's enemies. we are here because we do want to go back to september 10th and

nobody should dare tell new yorkers that we are here because we are a khalid sheikh mohammed afraid of -- because we are afraid of khalid sheikh mohammed. there are people who were appear before 9/11 were facing down terrorists and the people who are running this government now were pardoning terrorists. there are people here who, after 9/11, or fighting terrorists while people who are running this government were at guantanamo bay representing terrorists. we are not here out of fear. we are here because we want justice. we want the rule lot. the attorney general talks about the rule of law, but he does not seem to understand what the rule of law has always been in war crimes -- in wartime. in wartime the rule of law for

terrorists and for enemies is war crime trials before military commissions, not to wrap our enemies in our bill of rights, not to bring them to the majesty of a federal court house and clothe them and all the rights of the americans they're sworn to kill. will rule of law for wartime enemies has been military commissions since the beginning of this country. it was the right thing for george washington. it was the right thing for and jackson. it was the right thing for abraham lincoln. it was the right thing for franklin delano roosevelt. it is the right thing now and it has always been the right thing. never will be the right thing. a war is a war, a war is not a crime. you don't bring your enemies to a courthouse.

come away from us with one thing today. the people who made this decision are not your rulers. the people who made this decision are your representatives. the justice department is not eric holder's. the american government is not barack obama's. the government and the court house belonged to you. this decision does not have to stand. but we will have to be strong to change it. that means we have to light a fire under congress, because guess what? they work for you, too. congress is a master of the jurisdiction of the federal court. if they do not want this trial to happen, if they vote against the trial happening, it cannot happen. but they will not change unless they hear you. are they going to hear you?

thank you very much for coming out under these conditions. it's an honor to be here with you. let's get this changed. [applause] >> thank you. ladies and gentleman -- >> first off, let me just extend to my brother, in solidarity, hour and see who has been involved with us in many campaigns before. let's give a great round of applause. my sister in solidarity and has been pounding the pavement for years, seeking justice against our enemy, those who have tried to destroy our freedoms and our democracy. and to many of you who have joined us side-by-side and rub

shoulders before. can there be any more of an outrage? we saw the son of new york city, born in southeast queens, a double disgrace by bringing these jihadists to new york city, to add insult to injury. to give them a bully pulpit, [unintelligible] let us first honor those brave men and women in far off afghanistan and iraq who are pouring hot lead into the valleys of death because these jihadists bill warship a religion, they worship the cult of death. it is death they want, then death we should give them. let them go straight to hell.

to those men and women, those cia operatives in pakistan and other countries, often times anonymous, killed in action, never to be recognized, we universally salute them as they follow the enemies until the end of time, until every last one is killed and extinguished. ladies and gentleman, as we see, [unintelligible] if they want to jump on the paradise express' and go on thea up tollah's side, let's speed up

the process. to the brave men and women of the nypd, the new york fire department, the court officers, the federal marshals, the best deep -- the fbi agents, all of those who will be charged with our public safety when they are brought here, they are going to have to continue to risk their lives. the national guardsmen, those who are in the front line of our defense, they are the ones who will have to keep us safe and sound. let me tell you about this criminal justice system. as many of you know, i've had to sit through four trials against

john gotti jr., who tried to take my life on two separate occasions. four times congeries, four times jurists who said they were fearful and afraid. that is against a domestic terrorist. our we going to find a jury that can be safe and secure with khalid the schmuck mohammed and his jihadists? as i sat there during the deliberations, i had a lawyer said what a career break woodbury -- what a career break it would be to represents khalid sheikh mohammed v jihadists.

reporters who said what an opportunity to report each and every day what goes on in that courtroom. u.s. attorneys saying what a great career opportunity to prosecute khalid the schmuck mohammed. this is not about career opportunities. this is about freedom, justice, and the american way. khalid sheikh mohammed wanted to come off that plane and have a press conference after raining death and destruction. remember, his nephew was a bad seed who started all in 1993 with the first attack. the dna is poison down to the marrow of their bones.

i ask all of you in honor of all those brave men and women who have perished, the 9/11 victims, their families, our sons and daughters who will have to continue to battle al qaeda and osama bin laden, let's say to eric holder and 2 barack obama -- and to barack obama, we want justice, we want penalties we want them to know the wrath of america. and in every madras are on the world that produced the future

khalid sheikh mohammeds, let them know that until the day we die, we will kill them until the end of time. finally, whenkhalid the schmuck mohammed who have vowed to kill every american, every jew, and our freedom fighters, when they go for the judge, let us hope the wheel of fortune is not a friend of terrorists. when they come up with the sentencing, and they ask for death, that we put them all on the paradise express andzoom

them right on up to allah's side. >> ladies and gentleman, i want to introduce four of eight dads that make up what has become known as the band of dead. each one lost a firefighter son on 9/11. each one is a firefighter or former firefighter and they came to 9/11 and stayed there and helped and served four weeks and months after the terrorist attack. i want to welcome them. keep [-- the

[reading names] >> thank you. i was asked to come up here and say a few words about what this group of dad did at the site. i guess is a powerful story. when i got there, i met a lot of fathers and sons looking for their dad or for their sons. i met a lot of police officers looking for their sons and a lot of port authority police officers looking for their sons and relatives. so is small group of us stayed together and work together. some of us are on the stage and some are out in the audience. our mission was to look for the folks who were lost here at this site on 9/11. the process went on for many months. we stayed together as a group of

dads. we became an inspiration, i'm going to say, because it was a very difficult place to were, if you can imagine what it was like. but the men and women that we can never say thank you to in enough ways would look at us and say they have a mission here, so we should stay with them, band together, and we're going to work as hard as we can to find everyone who was lost at the site. that is how we worked together and stay together. for nine months, in recovery work. i have said before that i was blessed to be able to bring home my son, some of the dead here today, to this day have not been that fortunate. but we have to keep a clear message here.

the easiest thing for me, some of the other folks that work at the site, the dads on the stage, you out there that lost loved ones, the easiest thing to say is 8 -- -- is ha sayte. if we do that, we will ourselves to the standards of the people who did this. why am i appear? i am up here because on september 11th, war was declared on the united states of america. war was declared on all free world countries. in that process of war, we sent our troops off to fight it. we have lost a lot of beautiful young men and women in fighting this war and many more have been wounded. but in this process of fighting this war, our military and some of our agencies captured to? they captured terrorists.

they captured combatants that are at war against us. my feeling is they deserve a fair trial in a military tribunal. [applause] not on our soil. guantanamo is where it should be. that simple, nothing more, nothing less. thank you. [applause] ♪ >> ladies and gentleman, what i say "let's roll" you know what i

am referring to. the heroic efforts of flight 93 which was crashed in the field of pennsylvania things to the brave heroic efforts of the passengers led by todd beamer. let me introduce to you his dad. >> good afternoon, everyone. i am very, very thankful to be an american and to have the freedom of assembly and speech here today. the brief remarks i have are primarily directed to our president. mr. president, it is one thing to break a campaign promise, but quite another to break a solemn vow that she made in your oath of office.

you pledged to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of these united states. this trial decision is wrong. if you allow it to proceed, you will be breaking your sacred oath. it will be a second attack on new york city and america. it will be september 11th the sequel. mr. president, do not be a party to this -- do not be party to september 11th the sequel. right this wrong and stop this attack. mr. president, do not convey constitutional rights to the enemy. right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, do not erect barriers to victory on the

battlefields we are still waging. right this wrong and stop this attack. mr. president, do not risk our security, our intelligence, our safety. right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, do not make showing the world a priority. right this wrong and stop this attack. mr. president, do not put americans in harm's way. right this wrong. stop this attack. mr. president, do not provide ammunition for our enemies propaganda machine. right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, do not revisit the pain caused suffering, economic harm on the new york and on america.

right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, do not allow the enemy to set foot in america. right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, do not violate your sacred oaths. right this wrong, stop this attack. mr. president, i would have given my life to prevent september 11th, 2001. i merely ask you to exercise leadership, right this wrong, stop this attack. commander in chief, sir, once upon a time, a young man issued a call to action. to do the right thing. to fight back. when he said "let's roll."

the people of flight 93 did that successfully. commander in chief, sir, on this day, his old man is calling you to action. stand up, commander, issue a command. do the right thing. reverse this attack. right this wrong, stop this attack. one other thing, mr. president, our attorney general has demonstrated that any confidence placed in him is misplaced. he needs to be removed. [applause]

mr. president, holder must go. [applause] commander-in-chief, -- [but discernible -- commander-in-chief, stop the attack, fire eric holder. [applause] >> ladies and gentleman, all decent americans agree with us and all the some muslims agree with us.

we have many muslim supporters. i want to introduce to you the chairman of the board and a founding member of the president -- the president of the islamic forum for democracy. you may have seen him featured in a film that pbs would not broadcast -- is long first is long -- is llama verses -- islam vs. islamists. >> i stand before you as a doctor and a soldier. i serve in the navy probably on a navy scholarship. -- proudly on a navy scholarship. i also stand before you as a devout muslim. but most importantly, i stand before you as an american. while i do not have the name of

a personal family member that lost their lives and gave the ultimate sacrifice on 9/11 or on 11/5 at the massacre in fort hood, i share a deep kinship with all of them, especially the last 13. it is the ideals they attacked -- they attack our nation and they attack the very ideals of who we are as a country of liberty. these barbarians seek to destroy my country my family came from -- syria. that their country is so-called muslim land would not give them. like all americans, none/11, i heart sank -- on 9/11, my heart sank. the -- a country that gave my family the god-given right to practice their faith like no so- called muslim nation would do. each time i learned it was at the hands of muslims that this was done, i felt a greater responsibility to act.

because only muslims can defeat this existential threat. and i promise you, i promise you most american muslims, despite a relative silence do feel deeply the burdens to claim back our fate from these extremists, political and the audit -- extremists, political and theological ideology. the followers of radical islam are as war with this country's ideal and the very concept of -- concepts of the fine me as an american and as a muslim. this war has its kinetic elements and mr. khalid sheikh mohammed is the tip of the iceberg of what we are fighting. the enemy is not terror. that's a tactic. the enemy, the core of this conflict is the struggle between liberty and theocracy. between freedom and suprematism.

between democracy and fascism. i am here to tell you as a devotional muslim that while my family escaped much of the conflict in the '60s and left the oppressive fascists of the syrian government, on 9/11, it became clear they have all of us here to the united states and we of dedicated our lives to fight this conflict. our leaders in washington need to stop being naive. these are not run-of-the-mill criminals or just terrorists. they are enemy combatants and their hatched by enemy ideology. my enemy, our enemy as an american is ksm. my enemy is al qaeda, hamas and hezbollah. my enemy is the tall done -- the

taliban and the theocrats of iran and the brotherhood. i had the honor to serve in the u.s. navy for 11 years after a blessed military scholarship and that whole time, i never felt hyphenated or label. i served pure and simply as an american. let us not give this platform here to al qaeda and khalid sheikh mohammed. let us not give them this platform. we formed our american islamic form for democracy to build the future of our faith that is not in conflict with liberty, democracy, and the separated -- separation of mosque and state. political islam is a clear and present danger not only to americans, but muslims and the free practice of islam. after the fort hood massacre, despite what was presented as the overwhelming concern of harassment and other things,

most american muslims asked not about what was going to happen to us but how we could help prevent the next attack. that is what we are dedicated to. it is time for congress to formally declare war on of radical islamism and al qaeda and all of its brethren. we asked for military justice and let me be the first to say ksm i hope and mr.hasan and other radical list meet the ultimate punishment, which is the death penalty. i asked you after this rally to call, right, protest, to engage your community and engage your muslim and interface communities to speak out against political islam and the source of this radicalism and speak out against sharia law and other types of legality that is at the core of

what divides liberty from theocracy. it is time for muslims to shed the nile. lastly, let me assure you, just as easy my values of a father, husband and citizen, as an american muslim, know that there are thousands upon thousands of other american muslims who come out of the same fold i came out of. we need your help. connect us together. the ksms andhasans of the world are real. but there are also other muslims to take on the challenge of the civil war of ideas within the faith. thank you for including our voices. god bless you, god bless america, and we will never forget 9/11. >> ladies and gentleman, couple more speakers and then a couple of songs.

theresa is of the mother of a firefighter. he perished at the world trade center on 9/11. let me introduce to you, along with other 9/11 mothers who lost loved ones, other firefighters. >> good afternoon. standing with me today are a group of mothers who also lost their sons on 9/11. i am told to make my speech very short. how does a mother get up here and talk in two minutes about her beautiful son? i will do the best i can. michael spent his grammar school year filled with basketball, bowling, swimming team, boy scouts, altar boy, and music lessons with games of ball on

jordan street. he was always causing mayhem in school. it seems he had knack of sending his schoolmates into laughter and his teacher's hair to turn probably gray. with privileges denied, michael was a very repentant face with state i'm sorry, i will never do it again. that lasted about a week. he had a kind, thoughtful nature. he was always helping the neighbors and he had his own paper route, earning his own money. at the age of 16, summer jobs were hard to come by and michael sign up for a summer sayreville pull the cap in rock hill, n.y.. new campers arrive every two weeks meeting total care, feeding, bathing, dressing and exercise. he carried out every task

required for the well-being of this charge. he finished this summer with much praise from the staff for a job well done. i believe michael posner some routes were planted during the summer. -- michael's nursing routes were planted during the summer. then he joined the united states army. it turned out to be a good fit. he responded well to the discipline, learned to be focused and set goals. his adventurous spirit earned him a parachute badge for completing three jobs. now here is a little bit of humor of michael -- the amp finish, michael return home on leave. he was eager to show his teachers and how proud he was in his uniform. after our pleasant visit at the school and well wishes, he said goodbye. on his way out, he passed the

detention room with 12 sad face students with their heads down, riding a torturous assignment. michael, as mysterious as ever, steps into the room and said in a very authoritative voice, gentlemen, you are dismissed. instead of the expected laughter, the 12 students picked up their books, flew past of -- flew past michael and nearly knocked over in their rush to the door. he stood there dumbfounded. what did i do? i'd better get out of here quick before the brothers come back. he also ran to the front door. one brother stephen returned to an empty classroom, he quickly discovered a man in an army uniform dismissed everyone. during the last six months of michael's career, he passed the new york city fireman exam.

while he was waiting for his number to be called, he went to college and became a registered nurse. his life continue to be filled with music, song, and dance. he loved playing the piano and did a terrific imitation of jerry lee lewis. he was attending hunter college to attain a bachelor's degree in science and nursing. his goal was to become a nurse practitioner. this was michael's wife. as brief as i could tell you -- as was michael's life, as brief as a time i could tell you. by the will, and, and admission of these terrorists, michael was murdered on 9/11 at the age of 34. the city has been denied his bravery and protection as a firefighter. the nursing profession has been

denied his compassion, caring, and skills. the country has been denied his courage, military commitment, and loyalty as captain in the united states army reserves. and as a military man, he is deserving of military justice. [applause] we, the people of the united states of america, demand reversal of the decision to hold a criminal trial for these terrorists. [applause] 9/11 was a declaration of war against america. and as such, must be dealt with by military justice.

god bless america. ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, our final two speakers lost their son in iraq. he was an american hero. ron and robin griffin have kept up the fight in their here to speak to list out. -- speak to us now. >> good afternoon. it is a great honor to be here today to join with all of you in sending a clear and unmistakable message to attorney general holder and president obama that

their decision to allow these five terrorists to step foot on american soil is an abomination. [applause] it is beyond this pickle. it's sacrilegious. it's inconceivable to me that at some date in the future, these terrorists will stand in a court room of our country and have bestowed upon them all the rights of the country they want to destroy. this is more a debate about the finer points of law. this is about the raw emotions of the american spirit. 9/11 to us is a connection because 9/11 was his birthday. on 9/11, 2001, he was for

benning, ga. training. when i watch that television, and saw the first plane hit the tower, i had no idea what it was. when i saw the second in the background and saw coming toward the second hour and finally hit, i knew we were at war and turned to someone in said my son is going to war. we did not hear from kyle for two days. i brought with me the letters he wrote from basic training. very simple, and very much to the point. september 13th, to days after his 19th birthday. we got back to the barracks and the captain gave us a full briefing on what happened. it is very strange to me how i took the whole thing.

back when i was a civilian, things like this did not affect me. but now that i'm going to defend this country, it affects me in a very serious way. i don't want to scare any of you, but i could very well be at or shortly, after i graduate from basic and airborne school. this is from his second letter. september 15th. he says i understand congress has approved president bush's request to use discretion on getting revenge. and every unit is on alert. he called a 30,000 reservists for active duty. in the near future, we most likely will be going to invade afghanistan. i will most likely end up going, if this is going to be a long campaign, and they expect it will be, will likely be in the 82nd airborne. i will be deployed. this is the way i see it.

i don't wish for a war, but if there is one, you bet your ass i want to be there. [applause] that is my job, is what i sweat and lead for, and it is what i train for so hard day in and day out. all of my drill sergeants say if we go to war, they will be up all the private so they can be relieved from drill sergeant duty so they can go fight also. the funny thing is i believe them. it is amazing to me that on that day, i saw the first casualties of a war on terrorism. keitel came back to new york in december of 2001 and we walked around 9/11. a young man who is now a soldier knew what was going to happen. he loved what he did and he

knew the fireman, the first responders, police officers, and everybody there were the first casualties on the war on terrorism, and he was going to go fight for what they died from. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentleman, i can tell you how proud i am of all of you for coming. but this is not the end. this is the end of our program after the great daniel rodriguez seems -- sings for us. it's not the end of the fight. it's the beginning of the fight. we will not let this court house be used for the propaganda of the people that hate america. call your congress people. call your senators, fight through the ballot box, e-mail, and telephone. keep strong.

this is only the beginning. you'll be hearing from us again. america will be hearing from you. >> as we get better and better at what we do, we run an ever- increasing risk of over confidence and arrogance. >> for of milk in glass will's books currently sit on the new york times best-seller lists, including "what the dog saw." he is our guest tonight on c- span possum "q &a." >> a surprise attack on pearl harbor left 3000 americans dead. the national park service's has been collecting stories about the day. here is one. >> i was a crew member of the utility squadron 2 on the blue field side. that particular sunday, i had the duty and was actually at the hangar at the time the attack began and was waiting to muster

the ongoing duties section. we thought a plane had crashed and so we ran out of the hangar, looking across the runway. we saw the smoke coming up from have -- about that time, we saw an airplane dropped two bombs and pulled out of his died and we could see the symbol of the rising sun under his wings and we do you -- we knew we were being attacked by the japanese. i was still looking for a place to hide and here come the japanese planes flying from south to north on the west side of the island. they were flying so low i could see the goggles on the rear gunner's helmet as he swings his machine gun around and begins to strafe us with machine-gun fire. i looked up and see all of the concrete whe t