corruption issues, i think there are many things that stand out as good indicators of performance. you are of performance, but you all right. we need to measure these rigorously, and we have to have a system that does that and looks at these things consistently over time. i would say that one of the things i have tried to do at usaid is a focus on results and measurements, because too much of what we do is intended to create this. we have put a number of programs in place in afghanistan that really try to do that better and more rigorously. in a broader question, coming from a rule of law and

government background, at the end of the day, it will be the afghans who know best. it is the local people who know who is doing what. this is what at the end of the day, we have to empower afghans and afghan institutions to be the ones to carry this out. i return to the idea that the greatest ideas ever had in the federalist papers, at the end of the day, the factions that want power in the government are going to be the ones, and until such time we have them see their future dedicated to hold others to account, it will not work at the end of the day. we have seen some great signs of progress in that alert. but we have got a long way to

go. this gets to the broader question which i think you and many others have proposed. what is it about this transition that is going to take the afghanistan path, that we have all recognized in the coming years, with the change in international engagement do something that is going to look much more like stability. and i think there are a couple of key ingredients in their about the afghan ability and desire to make their institutions more self sustaining. their ability of some afghans to all others to account, and the desire to do that, the difference between them being able to carry forward and institutions carrying them forward, this brings me to the last point.

one thing that we will focus on that ron said, there really is no more important factor here than the long-term commitment, because all of the challenges that we have identified in this discussion will remain, but i think at the end of the day, we collectively, the united states together with our british allies will do so much for afghanistan, and our other allies, we have largely an often been in the last decade in a position of supporting the afghans as they leave themselves through this process, but knowing that we will continue to be there is going to be absolutely essential. >> a final comment. on the question about commitment.

there is nuance in them. that is unfortunate at some levels, mainly for the reasons that ron was getting at. but i do believe that giving a sense to afghans that there are certain people we have a hard time working with is not just bluffing. it has the advantage of being true, especially in difficult times. whether the message gets through is another matter. i appreciate the challenge there. and this is a variance on your question. which are unacceptable? but it probably would be in that category. i think it is worth trying to get that message through. the other way to address your question is that while afghanistan is very important to us, we should not and will not desert it the way we did 20 years ago.

we have scaled back a lot. if the wrong person is elected, and the wrong political process in sues, there are no guarantees. there are no guarantees, and the afghans should not have any guarantee of our commitment. if they are trumped by the presidential process that is correct, then i think all bets are off. and i make this argument with some reluctance, because i am to agree arguing against those who say this, but that it is a lot recker gives us maybe 10% to 20% less to make afghanistan succeed. it is a hard argument to make. the taliban could come back.

it does matter to us a lot. but we should not think that if the afghans in a terrible decisions that we can rescue them. i think it is worth trying to get that message through. >> 2.5 minutes for the hardest question of the day. ok. on the first issue about the british, there was a period where they seemed to be operating on its own. there is a pretty tied together strategy. i am really pretty impressed right now. i do not think that. ok. it was spoken that this has a

lot of elements of a conundrum, and i think you are right. i think this administration's policy toward afghanistan has been a conundrum. this was about reenforcing money and troops and commitment while signaling an end were the dates got too much emphasis and therefore set in motion all types of pressures and afghanistan. you can tell i am out of government. i do not think we will get away from that. but i regret it, because i think it has undercut our ability to achieve some of what we could achieve by needing people to believe we were heading out the door, even as we were heading in. therefore sending them --

sending afghans towards what i would call hedging behavior. protect your money, your family, your political inclination. the hedging behavior is totally counterproductive in order to succeed in the policy. that is one reason i hope for clarity. i do. secondly, more fundamental questions, and i am more than 60 seconds over. this was not a central theme of this discussion, but i do think we face the possibility, the very real possibility, of years, decades of instability in all of central asia stretching from pakistan if afghanistan turned into a cauldron of fighting as

there is the pullout. lebanon had fewer foreign players and was a somewhat less important country, and it went for 15 years in civil war. i do not see the taliban rolling back in. i see a disintegrated process that draws in all of the outside players, makes it impossible to stabilize, but pakistan at greater risk than it is today, has the potential to slop over into central asia. i cannot say exactly where that goes, but 10 or 15 years of having their area and stable in an area that now includes nuclear weapons, i think that is pretty catastrophic and something we should seek to prevent if we can. secondly, if we leave too early, and it does fall apart -- first of all, i think there has been

a push towards radicalization that has occurred. it is no longer an arab phenomenon. i do not know exactly, and i am not trying to say that i do, but if people believe they are not inspired in their attacks on us now see the vacation that the second superpower has been destroyed, has been defeated in afghanistan, i think they have an enormous psychological boost, which would invigorate that movement of attack on us for a long time to come. cannot prove it. there is a lot to worry about. worry does not justify endless expanse. expends has to come down. troops have to come down. but there is a difference between going down to a sustained level and doing it in

a rational way and just saying, "i am tired. i have to get out of here." i think too little of the debate focuses on getting out asks to me the two critical questions. do you disagree with the risk to national security that i think exists, which can make an argument for going home, but if you agree the risks are there, then the second question is am i prepared to tolerate these risks? because this is hard, i am willing to accept behind probability of more attacks on the homeland and more attacks on american interests and instability in afghanistan. all of those are entirely tolerable costs. if you are not prepared to make that argument, then there is a different argument about how much cost and how long. that is where i am in the argument, and thank you.

i would love to go on a little longer, but i am already significantly over time. thank you. >> please join me in thanking them. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> here is a look at our prime- time network beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern. joe biden and dr. jill biden of the national education association meeting today in washington. on c-span2, the weekend programs looking at the presidency beginning with michael duffy on the world's most exclusive, and on c-span3 tonight, american history television in prime time, with oral history interviews with key congressional staff in charge of investigating president nixon. that is all tonight on the c- span networks, and tomorrow, on the c-span july 4 schedule, we will begin at 10:00 a.m. with a gold medal ceremony with marines. a group of african american

marines in world war ii, from 1942 to 1949, stationed at a segregated camp just adjacent to camp lejeune in north carolina. house and senate leaders take part in the ceremony. and tomorrow evening, the history of the statue of liberty, talking about the beginnings and changing meanings of the american symbol. that is tomorrow evening, july 4, 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c- span. >> this weekend, go to the state capital named in honor of thomas dickerson with booktv in jefferson city, missouri. booktv on c-span2. the former senator on family life inside the governor's mansion from her book "if walls could talk." also, a business contract, eight provisions list from ancient mesopotamia and babylonian clay

tablets. and sunday on american history tv -- >> this was called the bloodiest 7 acres in america. >> going through the missouri state penitentiary. also, walk through the missouri state capitol and governor's mansion. once a month, the c-span local content of vehicles explores across america. this weekend, from jefferson city, sunday at noon and sunday at 5:00 p.m. eastern, on c- span3. next, the polk investigated seminar held in brooklyn, new york. the speakers included the 2012 winners from aljazeera, "the new york times," and others. this is just over 1.5 hours.

my name is david steinberg and i am president of long island university. days of the 63rd george polk award. it is extraordinary that this award has gained in strength and stature over the last decade. pursuing the story and murdered because of it. then of course there was a complicated second half of an investigation launched into who killed george polk, leading to some of america's most distinguished journalists participating at the very beginning of the cold war. we are proud and privileged to keep his memory alive and celebrate him. this evening's activity -- i

think we started, we were discussing whether it was 21 or 20 years ago. i think it is 21. it is certainly in that universe. what we suddenly realized was that at a lunch which will take place tomorrow where everyone is allowed a minute or so to speak. some obey, some not. there is a sense of rush. so we decided we would create a seminar for students, members of the working press and others interested in the topic. to invite several of the award winners to have a chance to talk about what they did, why they did it, how they did it, what happened as a result of what they did. this has grown handsomely and i mentioned to ralph, this is the campus-based part of the

program. we have students throughout the room. hopefully they will take heed from you good people and do some of the things you have done. for lifetime scholarly achievement. his most recent book is on fred friendly. we have a major program in the journalism. it is separate from the george polk award but intertwined. so i welcome you. i am thrilled you are here. it is now my privilege to introduce the curator of the polk awards. a man of himself extraordinary achievement, holding two polks and a pulitzer. you had been editor of a virtually every section known

to humanity over the years of "the new york times," including some that did not succeed but that is another discussion. ladies and gentlemen, let me john darnton. [applause] >> thank you very much. welcome to you all. this is a seminar titled "getting the ungettable story." i want to thank harvey simpson who is here and very passionate about investigative reporting. a donor to the program. my colleague, ralph. i see some judges here. we have our lifetime award winner in the audience.

we have our lifetime award winner, ronnie. [applause] the executive director of al jazeera english has flown over, john blair. he is here somewhere. i am sure i am forgetting some people so please forgive me for that. as most reporters can tell you, some stories are just simply hard to get. and they may be hard to get because the very institution you are covering is premised on secrecy or because let's say you are covering the crackdown of an authoritarian government and it wants to keep your footage off the air. or maybe you are a war correspondent in the middle of libya or afghanistan.

as winston churchill remarked, i think he said something about in war, the truth is precious. she must be surrounded by bodyguards of lies. finally, what if you have come with a wonderful, horrible scandal that involve revered people and people do not want to pay attention? we will be talking about these and other case histories today. we have a very strong panel. let me introduce them and get the discussion going. to my left, jane mayer. simply put, she isone of the country's most preeminent investigative reporters. for the past 17 years, she has been on the staff of "the new yorker,"specializing in politics and national security. she went to school in new york. graduated from yale university. studied at oxford.

then decided to go straight and worked for some small weekly newspapers in vermont. she worked 12 years at "the wall street journal" where she was the first female white houseshe has also been a foreign correspondent and war correspondent. she found the time to call off their two books. clarence thomas to the supreme feel free to ask for any supreme court questions later. the other on ronald reagan's second term. "the new yorker" -- she is known for exposing practices on the war on terror. torture, detention at guantanamo, the so-called rendition flights to countries that torture people. the detention about guantanamo. the so-called flights. the in the cia for legal

justification for what president bush used to call enhanced interrogation. all these things and more she examined in her best-selling books of 2008, "the dark side." the inside story on how the war on terror turn on -- turned into a war on american ideals. to her left is may ying welsh, the staff camerawoman, journalist and filmmaker for al jazeera english. she has worked for the pan arab news agency off and on since about 2003. she has ventured into dangerous parts of the world as a one- woman reporter -- she has reported on the u.s. bombing and invasion of iraq, the rebel camps in darfur, mass

killing in southern sudan and insurgency in northern yemen. she comes to the profession honestly, meeting, -- meaning, in san francisco where she was raised, her mother was a documentary filmmaker. her works, among other things, dealt with the tangent and military service of japanese- americans in world war ii. her father, here tonight, has a fascinating background. he is a retired postal worker and at one point was a reporter for ramparts magazine. she studied classical arabic at berkeley. and later at the american

university in cairo. she has worked out of the rome bureau of cnn and beijing as a freelance editor and camerawoman, covering everything -- the seize of chechnya, the earthquake in turkey in 1999. to her left, c.j. chivers of "the new york times"" simply put, he is the war correspondent's war correspondent. he is known for his courage, resourcefulness on the battlefield, knowledge of tactics and strategy and finally for his expertise in weaponry, in particular, ubiquitous ak47 about which he has written a definitive biography. a fascinating book called simply, "the gun." he comes from a military family. excuse me. i am getting a cold. after graduating from cornell university, he joined the

marinehe was honorably discharged as captain in 1994, went to columbia graduate school of journalism, worked at the providence journal in rhode island and joined the "new york times" in 1999. where he was promptly assigned to cover the cubs. part of his legend there is that on september 11, he sprinted from police headquarters to ground zero, remaining at the site day in and day out for two weeks. abroad, he has had numerous assignments, including a four year stint as a moscow correspondent. and a specialist in war zones. to his left, sara ganim. at the age of 24, she won acclaim for breaking the story of the penn state sex abuse case revolving around assistant

football coach jerry sandusy. and for staying ahead when the story spiraled into a national scandal. she was born in detroit but raised in fort lauderdale. she went to high school there and fell in love with journalism. she went to penn state and majored in journalism,she worked for the local paper in state college, pennsylvania. while there, she began to hear rumors about jerry sandusky's behavior. but it was not until she moved

on at the "patriot news" that she was able to gather enough evidence for a first page story in march. then a strange thing happened. not much of anything. for the most part, the story was ignored. it was not until november when she wrote about an indictment that was imminent that the outside world began to grasp the scope of the accusations against jerry sandusky and the university's failure to act upon them. thank you all for coming here. you may have to talk amongst yourselves for a while. i will like to start with you, did you tell us about your story involving thomas street, a high security agency who ran into trouble? >> first i also want to say i am really honored to be here

withwhen the reporting on this story, the only threat was the high calories from the diners were i was interviewing people. tom drake was somebody who work inside the nsa, totally secret national-security agency. he had become a whistle-blower. he had seen things that he was really upset about -- huge wastes of money. billions. he was very concerned that he thought the agency was violating civil liberties in a huge program. domestic surveillance. he understood because he was a computer expert. but the time i got to this situation, he had been charged

for leaking supposedly to a reporter at "the baltimore sun" his concerns. he was being charged under the espionage act and facing the possibility of life in prison. so it was a moment that basically any reporter knows, the lawyer for this man was saying what ever you do, do not talk to a reporter. and he had not talked to anybody at least on the record. my mission was to see if i could somehow get him to speak to me. it turned out he was not alone. he had a small group of friends who had also become disgruntled together. and they had all been rated by the fbi at gunpoint in the most incredible circumstances and were all certain they were being spied on by the nsa and that their e-mail was being looked at.

they were afraid to make phone calls. so i felt like i was dealing with the super paranoid. these guys really had enemies. one of the puzzles was to me was to figure out how to communicate with them. >> did he talk with you? >> how did you get him to open up? what happened was i had help. there was somebody who i had introduced literally eight years earlier. i had stood on her doorstep and she was not home but i left a note. she is a lawyer in the justice department who was also it was a lawyer in the john walker lindh case. she ran a center for whistleblowers and have been working with tom drake. the reason i was interested in this story at all was by the time he had been prosecuted, president obama waswe were supposed to be entering a new

regime of a president who was a constitutional law professor. i was curious about whether some of the people who had been whistle-blowers' during the bush years about the abuse of government would be dealt with differently under president obama. his case was a test of all of this, so, anyway. >> may, your documentary which is really chilling, you can see it all on youtube -- "shouting in the dark." i suggest you do. we have a segment of it. for about one minute. let's just play it, let's give you the flavor of it. [clip] >> bahrain. an island kingdom in the arabian gulf, where the shia muslim are a majority.

people fighting for democratic rights broke the barriers of fear. only to find themselves alone and crushed. this is their story and al jazeera is the witness. to follow their journey of hope. with the carnage that followed. this is the arab revolution that was abandoned by the arabs. and forgotten by the world. >> i encourage you all to seek it out on youtube. bahrain?

you went in on a tourist visa. what are the conditions like? >> at the beginning we were allowed to come in as tourists. we started filming in following the protests going on. there was a revolution in full swing. we started following a round the protesters. everything was pretty normal and then the crackdown started. it came in waves. protesters then pull back. crackdown when saudia arabia was invited into bahrain by the ruling family of bahrain. they started arresting everyone who ever associated with the democracy protests and torturing them. some of them were tortured to death.

with that phase happen, that is when it became very difficult to work there. >> how do you do it with the cameras? do you hawaii the camera? but in the beginning, -- did you hide the camera? >> in the beginning, we had the camera out. then we had to start putting it into a purse and going around wearing a hijab. i want to recognize my colleague in the audience tonight. he is a bahrainian journalist. [applause] he risked his life and freedom to work on this film. he basically help me move in this environment which wasyou cannot get from point a to b without going through

checkpoints. you could be arrested, get your equipment taken. we have to hide from authorities. >> where did you stay? >> we were staying in a hotel. then at a certain point, the regime came looking for us at the hotel. so he warned me that they were in the hotel. so we moved to an apartment building. we were there for a few days and the police came looking for us when we were not there. we had to grab all our stuff and pack it in five minutes. i moved to an abandoned office space. the regime in bahrain attract journalists and anyone they need to monitor to the mobile phones. we were basically after march 25 or so on the run from the government.

the whole time. >> and you were the only journalist there? >> journalists came and went. cnn came for a few days. then lost interest. we were the only channel that state. became early and did not basically leave until the possible to work anymore. >> chris, he spent most of the past year in libya afghanistan. i am interested especially in libya. you went in went into misrata. how did you get there and did you have an escape plan? what was a situation like there with the gadhafi forces all- around?

>> it was surrounded on three sides. the fourth side was water so thethe people had swords and stones. sometimes words they made with sheets of metal. -- sometimes lawrence -- swords they made. by the time we got there, they gadhafi forces and figured out how to fight. perhaps because their circumstances were such that it was truly fight or die. a lot of the libyan fighters could run away in other parts of not have that alternative.

through the school of experience, they began to not just stop the gadhafi forces were they penetrated the citybut you could not quite tell that. the city was being randomlyyou could not step into some of the streets because of the snipers. alone. getting the story out. we left. other journalists came in. some were killed. then it was a mass exodus after story you train your whole life for. we went back in. >> is it true you have a disguise? that you would have used? >> >> there was no way to rely

onthere were fishing boats doing some smuggling and tugboats as well. but they were pretty closely held coming and going. the bay had a very high sea conditions. and the city was strung along the coast line. the port was at the far east. we went to far west. so at the road to get cut, we would not reach the port anyhow. i decided i was reasonably fit and had an understanding of these guys. if the road gets cut, they are not going to surrender so i would just go with them. clothes. i thought this particular group of rebels with a fight.

they turned out to be some of the toughest rebels in libya. closed behind us, we would just stay. >> sara ganim, how did you first hear about the jerry sandusky scandal? it down? how many resources did you have for your story? i first heard about it right after i graduated from penn state. i had been a part-time reporter and a small paper. there were seven and a half reporters there. i was that half. when i graduated, they had a full-time position for me but they were going to split it up. until they found someone to take the other half, i said i could have a seat until we find something. i really wanted to prove to

them that i could have the entire beat. it consumed my entire life. i was really trying to create a story -- my main focus was to build a good source base. i think that would be the way to get that story that would prove to my boss that i could do this. i got into this habit of asking people after every conversation, no matter what it was, i would say what else is going on. tell me what else you know. what else should i be working ona lot of times it led to my trash pickup is not regular or my son's soccer coach does not play him enough.

ridiculous stuff. this is small-town pennsylvania. but occasionally it lead to something good. it was probably 11:00 at night. i was working on a story on related and asked a source at the end of the conversation what else is going on. this person told me well, actually, jerry sandusky has been accused of molesting a child from a charity. to be honest with you at the time, he was 10 years out of retirement from the football program but he was mostly known for the charity. i vaguely remembered jotting his name down on a note, putting it on my computer screen and say i will look tomorrow. because it was late at night. that is how i first heard about it. i tried to follow up. >> was that a police officer are somebody who was knowledgeable about the grand jury? or can you say? >> i really do not want to.

it is interesting though, because that person they call me back six days later and said that thing i told you, forget it. it did not turn out to be anything. >> the ultimate confirmation. >> exactly. exactly. and, you know, i really could not get anywhere for a good amount of time. brick walls. it was not until a couple of tournament for that of that, that charity, and jerry sandusky is not there. and he is always a big speaker there. i asked somebody where he was and they said he has family year. then i asked somebody else and they said he has health problems. so that was really when the story took off at that point. how many sources -- it took, i think we counted somewhere around 25 people i talked to.

some of them for one or two minor details, others for 5 or 6 different interviews. we only had one person on the record who gave us something substantive. one person. we set a high standard for how many unnamed sources we were going to need before we went with it. we landed on five. but independent people we felt otherwise. >> you were very confident by the time -- >> at 4:00 -- strange take away from this. i was teaching a journalism class at the time at penn state. this thing breaks in the

morning. on the road, drove up to state sandusky had put out a statement through his attorney saying he was innocent. we knew. >> let's talk about sources. jane, how to cover such a secret organization? are there people who dissent on policies willing to talk off the record? so they weapons of mass destruction in iraq? -- say weapons? or are these people you have known for years to trust you? >> in this case, one of the

sources was somebody you i had formed a bond with eight years earlier. you never put out a phone number. it does become much harder in washington when you are writing about national security to get people to talk to. because of the kind of prosecution of people who are sources, which is what whistle-i have had a number of sourcesthe legal term is it chills things. and, boy, is that not a metaphor. it is for real. when you are a reporter, you cannot get people on the phone suddenly. they are aware that their own phone calls are being monitored and they may be prosecuted just for talking to us. so it has been increasingly difficult in some ways to do so. so you end up figuring out other ways to meet people. i have not gone to underground garages like woodward and bernstein, but some really bad restaurants.

i have had people over to my house. he was so wound up that he came at like 9:00 in the morning and left at 9:00 at night. finally said to me afterwards, is he okay? but people when they're about to be prosecuted for something that might put them away for life, do have that kind of look to them. and that became -- i had one moment of doubt. in this story. i was interviewing officials at the nsa trying to knock the story down. they wanted to kill it.

there was one especially affect official, a woman, who basically said -- i feel so bad for him. he is just not well. and she went into this whole thing about he has family problems, it is a recurrence in his life. but the time i left i was thinking, maybe he is not sturdy. it was a rashomon thing for a bit. but with the help of this whistle-blower lawyer and his colleagues, able to confirm the story. but that kind of insidious "i feel so bad about him" was tough. it shook me for a bit.

>> major charges against him were dropped after your story. >> that was incredible. yes. i mean, i do not know. i cannot take credit for it. but it was unbelievable to see the case unravel. i think the judge did not buy it. it went from 35 years possibly to him and pleading to a misdemeanor. in order to get this thing over with. he had refused to plea-bargain all the way through because he absolutely would not be -- can see to something he did not do. everybody wanted him to cut a deal. at some point he was on the literally. participant in the story and he was saying what should i do? i was not likely to -- i cannot give an opinion on this thing. but anyway, it was incredibly

gratifying to get the case exposed for the fraud it was. >> where his now? >> he works at local apple store. he was a computer expert. i have a really bad computer thing. i feel so lucky. i have someone else to help me for life. [unintelligible] [laughter] >> may, your sources -- i am thinking about the doctors at some of them paid a price. >> right. almost every single source we had was arrested and tortured. with maybe one or two exceptions -- the exceptions. so can you imagine the chill that puts on things? i mean, you know, nobody wants to talk to you after they see that everybody who talked to you before is in the prison and being beaten and forced to drink

urine, etc. etc., you know? stuff that leads you scarred for stood up and say -- stood up and say i would like democracy or ask for anything. you know? so, you know, basically what we had to do after that chill was being settled on bahrain which drive to people's houses unannounced. i cannot call on the phone because there all monitored. i would wear a hijab with my camera in the back and offered to talk to them with a silhouette interview or filling only their hands -- filming their hands. some people were so scared that they were afraid their silhouette would be recognized for their hands would be -- or that their hands would be recognized.

or that the furniture in their house would be recognized. i mean, people were so afraid. but there were some very brave people that were so determined to get the truth out there that day were willing to take risk and continue to talk to us. >> were some of the workers at the hospital also tortured? the doctors and nurses? >> yes. the doctors, nurses, medical staff. there was one medical staff person who was not arrested but tortured -- he was always calling me continuously. i never actually called him. people have this need to get the truth out there. because al jazeera was the only channel that was always there. people felt that no one was paying attention to their story. they felt really alone. the world paid a lot of attention to egypt and tunisia and at that point was paying a

lot of attention to libya yet somehow bahrain wasn't registering. it did not matter. so they were really -- this one guy who was a medical staff worker at a hospital was taken down to the market by the police and the army -- the morgue. he was tortured. he was forced to lick their boots. they do a lot of humiliation stuff to people, forcing them to say things that are embarrassing. begging him please stop talking to me. >> he still wanted to talk to you, even after a that type of treatment? and they told him you have been talking to a journalist, haven't you? torture session. the journalist he had been talking to was me. >> but that also makes it hard for guilt. >> of course.

i was telling him, let's stop this now. we do not need to keep going. then other people would send me an sms sein thank you for your -- send me an sms, sayaing thank you for your concerns, please never talk to your concern, please never talk to me again. and pray for me. >> do you think the fact that you are a former marine captain helps you in situations where you deal with the military? do they seem to trust the more because of that? what is your secret? i know you what a lot of trails m -- walk a lot of trails with guys living their life as they do day in and day out. does that help you get a sense? >> being a former marine and infantry officer, i used to lead in trade for patrols. it cuts both ways. it does help. but it also hurts. people often expect you to enjoy and circulate the prevailing narrative, even when

it is false. sometimes you are on patrols and you see things happening that are much different than the way they should be happening. as a journalist, you cannot speak up. you cannot be direct the patrol. -- cannot redirect the patrol. >> even if it is going into a dangerous situation? >> you are there not to lead the patrol. you are a journalist. the patrol is perhaps an essential thing on the military level but terrible on this human thing. i mean, it is armed, people moving over grant, up against other armed people, and at any moment, any of t influenceyou are just there to document it. that can be very difficult for it i went on a patrol where someone got shot through the spine. i did not speak up beforehand. there is a reason you cannot speak up. because, and it was only a

hunch. i had not seen anything in particular. >> if you saw somebody was -- >> it had to do with some particular military reasons, some drills that you go through. you take contact at certain ranges. immediate action drills. the patrol put itself i thought on the wrong side of a canal. they should have been over on that side. if they took some fire from that side, they could have moved through it. i almost said something, like," are you sure you want to go this side? they did not. they came under fire, and they got shot. but had i said something and they had gone to the other side and someone had been shot, that would have been on me. and i never could have gone out again. but it is to not just with the military.

they were dangerous. their commanders or often stay way back from the front. these young libyans were being killed foolishly. they were firing indiscriminately. they did not have the firepower. but they were using the weapons that they did have in a similar fashion. this was not a popular narrative at all, but it needed to be told. i would collect the battlefield debris, witnessed the stuff myself. i would identify the weapons being used, who they were being used by a report what the facts showed without going to someone to confirm it. because i had been there. >> rerecording if it was critical? >> i would not try to write a story that would redefine -- i thought my job was to write a chip by chip account of what i

could document. it was kind of like a creeping tight, not like one big way. -- tide, not like one big wave. >> you want it -- one of the prevailing narratives was the bombs were meticulous and not leading to many civilian casualties. >> it was that it led to zero casualty's and that was easy to document. passably false. the campaign was -- >> what did you do in that it to wishing? what there were a few different steps. they dropped a bomb beside me experience to see their statements on something i had an intimate experience with. they tried to say it did not

they tried to say it did not happen and they gave a bunch of statements. the was another occasion where they bombed a group of the anti gadhafi fighters and they killed 13 of them and they denied that. they deny that for six or seven months. they issued statements saying we have looked at this closely which is why we are delaying our answer but we want to be sure of the facts. i cannot go out to it that day. i waited in went out later and i collected all the bomb debris, identified interested right back. i spent a lot of time going to different sites, documenting who was killed, gathering death certificates, retrieving bomb debris from the rubble. simple forensics. figuring out where it had been manufactured, what it was. making very clear that it was only nato inventory. nothing that was in the gadhafi inventory.

we had in the end about 27 pages of facts and mammals, pictures -- facts and memos, pictures. nato was not interested in receiving them. b. presented this to them and give them several weeks to reply -- we presented this to them and gave them several weeks to reply. they did not contest. what did they change the policy at all? >> it is hard to tell. nato is an unusual organization that stands for on the surface transparency, civilian control of the military. yet when you go to nato and sable like to talk to about this particular event, there is

anonymity whereby each country that participates in nato on the operational level announced -- anonymously. you do not know which country dropped the bomb. so each country and its public, the nation itself does not necessarily know. so when you go to nato they will say you have to talk to the host participating nations about this. the nation's say you have to talk to nato. at the end of the day while the campaign was mostly for size, there were a number of mistakes. >> is it true that you

discovered a spanish cluster in addition that had not been used before in war? but there is a type of spanish bomb that had never been used and no one knew it had been sold to the gadhafi forces. i had a strong hunch of what it was. but you do not want to say this is a spanish cluster on a hunch. there were no available open source photographs of this thing. there had been a number of casualties. you could observe them being used. i gathered up a lot of the debris. i had friends in the community that disabled bombs so i took these images over night and sent them to friends out of the military. these guys are for guys and they were able to go into some publication they have and they came up with the identification of what exactly this was.

we were able to establish that -- we were able to say that very clearly. they later denied it. i found the export licenses and was able to show that they had been transferred into libya. >> sara ganim, your story appeared at the end of march. it was not widely picked up. why do you think that is? but i have tried not to guess at the answer. the thgs that i heard from other reporters was that because our story was sourced, 90% sourced by people they could not verify because they were not

named, there was a good degree of skepticism that it was correct. what baffles me about that was that even after jerry sandusky said are facts were correct, he was innocent, there was still a lot of reporters with and pennsylvania -- within pennsylvania that said we would never run that story if we had that. people told that to me, my boss. they were very clear. they said you have ruined that guy's life if he is not charged. our response is always, we did not say he was guilty. he said he is under investigation. and if it does not lead to charges, we will write that as well but this is a fact, a truth. it is under investigation. and more than one alleged victim has come forward. but still, i love the news organizations did not want to

touch it. -- a lot of news organizations did not want to cut it. i do understand on a more national scale -- espn picked it up. ap did a rewrite. i can see organizations saying who is "the patriot-news?" >> it might have been different had you worked for a major national paper or something? >> i do not know the answer. >> maybe they were not able to mask your sources. >> the ap picked it up. >> they probably attributed it to "the patriot-news." >> some of that, yes. i did not hear much feedback. but i think what was disheartening was to hear it from other local reporters.

>> then suddenly in november when the indictment came, everyone rushed in and it became a major story across the country. >> at that point the story was a lot different. there were days where i counted only one day -- i had 86 interview requests. from reporters. >> so they felt comfortable that there was a paper charging the man? >> yes. also at that point, there were things we could anticipate what we did not feel comfortable clothing -- putting out there before the charges.

it was not publicly known that this was going to engulf the university, a charity, the governor essentially. we had a pretty good grasp from where it could go. even for us, i would like to think that we knew as well as anybody -- i was completely shocked when joe paterno was fired. i just did not see that coming. i did not see even the firing of the penn state president coming. i do not know that answers your question but i think it really took on a life of its own very quickly. but there were demonstrations in favor of joe fraternal. did people -- joe paterno. did people turn on you? >> things working at a rapid speed. because of the rioting in

protest on the campus, i would go into an interview for an hour and i would miss three events that were breaking. there was one time that i did get a little nervous. these are 500 or so drunk college kids. and they are rioting. i was going to 1 and of the compass to another. i found myself and a photographer -- i cannot even tell you where we were. but it was clear that we were media and they started screaming obscenities and threatening that they would come after us. i thought they are probably not but it really take just 118- year old drug kid to think that is a good idea -- 18 year old kid to think that is a good idea and come after us.

a couple nights later, they turned over a news van. at that point i got a couple of e-mails saying we wished you were in the news van. >> qatar is a part of the gulf cooperation council. what kind of reaction did your piece get from the authorities in bahrain? >> there was tremendous pressure to remove the film from the air. this film was a huge scandal in the gulf. this was a very embarrassing thing for the bahrain regime to

have the things they did exposed -- the tortures, killing, disappearances, arbitray arresrts. and for qatar -- there is a firewall. whenever a country like saudia arabia or kuwait doesn't like something on al jazeera, the protest to qatar. the first thing that happened when the phone went on -- the film went on the air, within minutes of it being over, the former minister of bahrain sent out tweets criticizing the film. they are relatives of the bahrain family and they did not understand this was an independent film by al jazeera.

there was a diplomatic protest letter and people inside qatar that hated the film. the was a lot of pressure from people saying how dare you hear this pack of lies against our brothers -- air this pack of lies against our brothers. instead of removing it from the air which would have been a disaster, al jazeera created some extra programming around the film to give the regime in bahrain a chance to give people an opportunity to debate. people were attacking members of the ruling family over social media.

>> it was broadcast in english but not arabic. >> right. then somebody in bahrain translated it and put it up on you too. it got half a million hits in english and arabic. >> so many people there have seen it. but everybody in barain have seen the film. also saudia arabia and kuwait, united arab emirates. it is the only real document of the arab revolution that happened in the gulf council state.

there is not another comprehensive document that shows exactly what happened. people wanted to see this thing they had not been allowed to see. >> sees a right at the very beginning -- you say right at the very beginning -- by the way, she shot, edited, wrote and narrated it, but you say at the very outset there is a sunni shiite split. that must be almost inflammatory for many of the royal family is in that region for which that is also true.

was that an item that caught their attention? >> it is just a fact that they are majority in bahrain but even hearing that fact spoken out loud makes people very angry. the proximity of iran to the gulf council countries make the extra sensitive. yes, to an american audience, awestern audience, this film is, i don't know, some of -- somewhat explosive. for a community of people that don't talk about these things publicly, this film was a bomb. >> you're dealing with a lot of hidden issues. jane, you mentioned that most of the previous work had been about abuses under the bush administration and obama came to office with promises of transparency.

but he has had more prosecutions of governmental whistleblowers in his administration than any of his predecessors. he has not been able to close guantanamo. do you think the situation in which this country is, with the sense of threat, is one that is leading to a notion of civil liberties? i worry that it is. the national security community has become so entrenched and powerful in washington. it is very hard to push it back. politically, it is hard to push back in congress. some of not closing on, now -- not close in guantanamo is some of the opposition obama got before tried to do.

they did not get very far. i don't think they did a priority. with the drone program and prosecution of those who are critics of these programs to reporters, i think it is a big worry.

i don't see it as necessarily over. there is a lot of turmoil in this. there is a big role for the press to play. >> chris, what you think of the drone program and reactions to that when you're on the ground. when you get into the mind of a pakistan who sees a drone coming overhead? what about the american fighting man? you documented some of the frustration they felt. this was in october, not long before the major incidents. what is it like on the ground? >> for the average person that is fighting the war, that is

not an issue. drones are politically potent. they're not especially impact will. they do not have a heavy payload. the typical infantry platoon is much more concerned about what is going on a few miles around it and that will be inside afghanistan, unless they're a border unit. so you deny hear a lot of discussion about -- so you do not hear a lot of discussion about the rounds. it is a much larger issue when you get next to the border. when you get next to the border, the current generation of troops who have been -- who have essentially inherited real estate that was occupied and developed in a military sense by units years ago, the local occupation and the local fighters, where the bases can see and where they cannot say, the current generation of fighters or there are in many ways like sitting ducks.

it is such a hot war around them. i have been to firefights were people turn to me and say, hey, can you tell my congressman about this because i cannot. >> how do you answer that? you say i am writing the story. >> that is why we're here. that is why we what are you walk. for a lot of the troops out there now, they are there for institutional and personal

reasons. i do not think that, in the rank-and-file, there is a lot of hope. that they will be will to reorder afghanistan the way that there were told when they joined that they might be able to. in a lot of respects, they are out of ideas. >> is the u.s. losing the war? >> losing and winning -- how would you define it? there is this broad list of tasks that was set out to do after 9/11. will the u.s. succeed in bringing women's rights to afghanistan? will the u.s. have an effective strategy over a -- in succeed in treating a government that is

moderately what it is supposed to be? the answer to all of these questions is of course not. the list of task is a long -- is so long. it is not a matter of winning or losing. it is a matter of reaching an acceptable level from which to withdraw. >> since 1 of the reasons that we went into afghanistan in the first place was to protect the united states against allocate at and terrorism, -- against al qaeda and terrorism, is there at least that to? >> i am hesitant to answer that question. the question if afghanistan is safe now or a breeding ground, you can say, in some ways, it is less so. the threat has migrated. is that success? is that value? is the price of blood and time

and the credibility of the nation -- i ask people on the ground, let's draw a line and and say we are trying to bring water to this village. we can do that. can we connect that to being safer in a shopping mall in cleveland? no.

>> if you have a question, there is a microphone. i would like to ask a larger question about sex abuse cases. you heard when there was this strange epidemic of charges against nursery schools, one in california, one in boston, one recently in new jersey.

workers who were prosecuted and were in some cases sent to jail who were led by people who believe strongly that there was satanic ritual. it was a very strange period in the history of american psychological epidemics. it is a very touchy issue, but said. you have covered other sex abuse cases. what is the best way to oppose this as a problem? should we have websites with the names of sexual predators'?

have you balance -- had you get to the truth of a case? had you ensure that people are not accused unjustly or not allowed to continue if they are in fact guilty? >> i try not to have a silver bullet answer to a question like that. but i can say that really the only rewarding thing about this experience for me has been the amount of people who are talking about sex abuse, not just child sex abuse, but all six abuse. very early, after the charges were brought, the psychologist for one of the alleged victims said to me, you know, this boy, who was 17 at the time, had seen that coming ford was a good thing because the allegation -- coming forward was a good thing because the allegation was in syracuse. child sex abuse victims who were then adults, because of these people, i will tell my story, too.

i think that is the biggest problem. we don't talk about it so we don't educate ourselves about it. i know that there is now this push for the sex abuse registry and a lot of states are deciding not to comply with it because of the way that it was set up. there were strings and the cost of it and the personnel that it takes to run something like that. i don't know what the answer is on that level. but i never interviewed a victim who said to me later on i wish i would have kept this to myself. i have never had that.

i have always admired the strength of victims who are talking to me. i imagine it is a very difficult thing to do. i think that is a situation where it is incredibly difficult to make that decision and i do think that talking about it is important and not just for the victims, but for those of us who don't understand it. that is how we educate the next generation. it is incredibly important. if you have a question, just step right up to the microphone. >> my name is edward hershey. chris, you're no longer an infantry captain. you're a journalist. you put yourself in danger. who do you speak to about, if at all, the risk-reward aspects? do you touch your editor? to your loved ones? to yourself? >> why we do what we do is pretty easy to answer. i get afraid on sundays, very

afraid. but a lot -- i get afraid some days, very afraid. i had a conversation with somebody very close to me, with my wife not too long ago. i said, i don't know how many of these firefights we have done. we lost track a long time ago. and sometimes you're not afraid. and she said, well, you know. i am your wife and these are your kids and we are terrified. so why do i still go out? i have been going up all these years? the answer is, when you take that measure, sometimes used a back -- and the answer is that it is for the readers. it is not for me.

if there is something i don't know and i am still trying to find it, i will keep going out. if there is something to learn out there and i think there is, there is good news reason, i will show you the risk. if there is no news reason -- my principal partner's father is in the audience. sometimes we will sit and want to do something and we will say to each other, hey, if this one goes bad, what does the guy who does not get hurt tell the family? was there a reason for what we are about to do, a news reason? is there something here that the readers in the united states and beyond the united states understanding this more fully?

if not, we're just repeating this experience. we need to back up. we need to do not our families at risk and not hurt ourselves. it comes down to all of these issues that you mention. if i got on this one, cannot justify it? if you can not, you might die. if you're telling a story that simply would not be told and you have the courage to do, sometimes, the stories are not quite like that. sometimes the stories are a little more familiar. and there are days where i say i will not do this one. i might come away with a set of notes. we will sit this one out. inelastic, there have been many days like that. -- in the last decade, there have been many days like that.

>> a good question. >> i am an adjunct professor at nyu. there are stories of teachers and the school system having affairs with some other students. do you think there's a difference when the alleged perpetrator is a male or female in a way that it is reported? >> that is a good question. i would like to think not. i know this question came up a lot in the beginning of this

scandal unfolding. several people said to me -- and i was at a panel on penn state a week after it happened -- if the eight alleged victims had been girls instead of boys, would we be here? would we be talking about this? with the reactions have been the same? and i don't know that i can answer that. but i do know that in central pennsylvania, there's definitely a reaction -- let me back up. i think the reaction to hearing the rumors was different in this case in central pennsylvania then there would have been if they had been girls, it the rumors were that jury sandusky had been accused of abusing little girls. i think that the reaction in a

town like that would have been different. but obviously, i don't have any proof that it would have changed. either the course of the investigation or his career or if he had left. i have no indication. >> thank you. >> hello, my name is nancy. i am a regular citizen who believes in the importance of good journalism and want to congratulate all of you for a rally where the profession that you have chosen and that you have done. my question is to john and jane. john, you had mentioned that, since in the obama administration there is more prosecution of whistleblowers, i was very surprised and disturbed to hear that and i would like to hear you or jane speak to that as to why that might be. >> we're talking about

government will whistleblowers. we are up to six. the highest it had been before was 3. it has roughly doubled. as to the reason, as jane for the easy part of the question. [laughter] >> i think it represents a mind- set in washington, which is that we are still ostensibly in a state of war, the war on terror, and it is global. his starkly, in american history, -- historically, in american history, these stories have been loaded. i went to an off the record conference with some of the top people in the legal advisers at the cia and others in the intelligence community. some of them are political

appointees in the obama administration. they really don't like the press. i thought it would be different somehow in a democratic administration. but they really think that we are weakening the country by writing about some of these issues. what is troubling to me is that there is a very fine line between writing about things that might be national security concerns and writing stories that may be embarrassing to them politically. like everybody else on the stage here, i think the bottom line for all of us is really that we really believe that telling the truth and getting it to the american public so they can make large decisions about their own democracy.

that is what we are all here for. we really believe in getting that information out there. i can tell you that it is not a unanimously held position at the top of the national security community. >> my name is matt. i am working journalists. the doctors that appeared in your phone, they stated that they were -- in your film, they stated that they were working objectively. but others said that they were working with the protesters. why were the doctors targeted? was it because they were speaking with you? did you see any evidence of their activities? >> the doctors and nurses, the first thing they did that upset the government was that they were assisting the protesters who had been beaten or shot by a regime and they allow that to be filmed and documented.

they let me come in and fill all that stuff, which was incredibly -- and film all of that stuff, which was incredibly embarrassing. the other thing they did was defied the government. the government was told them no ambulances. we will send our military ambulances. we decide who gets help and when. and some of the hospital staff defied the orders and sent an ambulance anyway. another thing that a set them is that some of those doctors and nurses were politically opposed

to the regime. some did protest in their off hours. in general, there was a mood in bahrain, a revolutionary mood, where everyone was hoping the protesters, except for some regime loyalists. the hospital became a safe space for the protesters and that upset the government. at one point, the charges were set against the doctors. one of the charges was that they had created injuries in the protesters and invited the journalists to document that. that is the level on which the government was dealing with the doctors and nurses. >> i am the chief editor of my high school newspaper. last year, when i saw it, the crowd was cheering and i

wondered why. they were cheering the death of osama bin laden. me, as a person, personally, do not think that humans should be celebrating the death of another man. what is your take as journalist who sees the turmoil that terrorists because society? [laughter] >> i had this conversation with my daughter. she was in high school last year, too. she was out as a crew member on the potomac river and cannons were being shot off to celebrate. she went to a quaker school and she was very disturbed about this. what can i say? first of all, as a reporter, i feel uncomfortable in some ways

opining about things anyway. inon't take great pleasure anybody's death. but i thought that -- it was not something i wanted to jump up in the streets about. but i sort of thing, and i told her, that it was a justified death. >> as journalists, i think my reaction to that would be trying to cover the people that were covering osama bin laden's death and figure out why they

were celebrating his death and look more deeply into why did they think that way. what are the values that america represents that are different from osama bin laden? i would more investigate it as a journalist and use it to understand and help others understand. >> where did you say you heard this cheering? >> a baseball game. >> so it was a crowd reaction. people were already assembled. there may be some mob element to it. but i think there is irrelevant response to that. but think you'd have to take the very wide survey. i was in his rodham -- i was in misrata in the middle of a firefight. i woke up and we were sleeping on the side of the building. we figured out where many of the shells are coming from and we put ourselves on the far side of the building where we thought we could take a direct hit from

some of their fertility and survive it. food supplies were still ok. but there were worries about fuel. there are worries about getting a lot of laborers out and a whole mess of tactical and humanitarian problems. i woke up and my colleague said some choice words and said that osama bin laden was dead. and i thought, we're busy. this places busy. i have seen 9/11. i have seen the costs of 9/11 parent and the cost of western reaction to 9/11.

i have seen the world get up and did -- but ended -- up ended. i was struck by where was that day and the irrelevance of the information. >> my observation that there was that i found, in the city where i was living and from reading of a people's coverage, a lot of those people were young. i think what chris was saying about mob mentality might play a little bit into it. but you have to remember that i am that age. so those young people were old enough when it happened to remember a world before 9/11 and also young enough to see that their lives going forward

will be tremendously changed by that. i think that plays into it. i think that they feel, even if they had no -- i am sure every american feels personally attacked. but the point of view when you are young -- i think if you asked some of those people who went out that night and cheered in 25 years if you do that again, they might say no. when i covered the riots after the joe paterno firing, i asked people why are you out there? they would say, because my friends are here. because it is a historic night. i was on his front lawn.. about 20 kids were on his front

lawn just staring at his house. you could hear the roar downtown of the street fights coming down and the riot that was happening. there were 5000 kids downtown and there were 25 on his front lawn. i asked what made you come to his house instead of going downtown? they said i'm going to downtown next. i just wanted to come here first. it may have something to do with youth. >> we are in overtime. we have time for a two quick questions. >> great panel. it would be wonderful to ask you all questions. but i will ask one. you work for an interesting hybrid beasts. could you explain how that works? could you explain who aljazeera english is and who aljazeera is and what the overlap is? what is this beast? >> al jazeera started out as an arabic channel.

in 2006, it launched english. they have two separate buildings and have separate staffs. i think the editorial decisions they make are more for an arabic-speaking audience. and for the english channel, it is more what is of interest -- i don't want to say a western audience because we do have viewers in india and others. >> it is astonishing what you can do on al jazeera english cannot be played for the interested parties in the arab world. anyway. -- in a way. >> i don't work for the channel

anymore. i cannot speak to their decisions at this time. i can only talk about the editorial decisions on the english channel. bahrain in the dark was only aired on the english channel. >> my name is harvey simpson. i am a world war ii and korean veteran. when we won in germany, we put our military colonels and captains in charge in every town and village. the germans cooperated in all cases. now you have a situation where religion is involved in this war in iraq. there have been fighting each

other for a thousand years. do you think anything we have done there be successful? i feel like everything we have done there has been a complete waste. i have one more question about afghanistan. we have been in afghanistan for good reason. we defeated the taliban and have them on the run. now we leave 10,000 men and concentrated on iraq. how do you feel about that? had we not gone into iraq and put 60,000 people in afghanistan, we could have defeated taliban. by decreasing our troop strength, they are back. i think they will always be back. again, religion is involved. i do not feel that, in these types of wars, we can win any of them.

>> so what is the question? [laughter] >> do you feel that in fighting the stuff of wars, like in iraq where religion is involved, can we ever change the nature even when the war is over? the shiites and sunnis have been fighting each other for several years. >> if you were 22 now and wearing the uniform that the men and women are wearing their now, you would not sound very different from any of them. i will rely on someone else's words. a photographer who lost his legs and afghanistan. i had gone to iraq in 2006. we were laying around one night and we had sleeping bags. he said, you know, we're just a passing the storm -- a passing dust storm. i think he believed it could i think a lot of people do. how do you fight a war in a place like this?

it is a lot different than the wars fought in your time, where it was countries we were fighting against. if there had not been iraq, we would have defeated the taliban once and for all -- i think that, if we had not gone into iraq, afghanistan would have been different. would we have defeated the caliban once and for all? i don't think so. -- defeated the taliban once and for all? i don't think so.

this gets to what are you trying to do? this is a whole conversation. i would not give a silver bullet to a question like that. i would say don't sit on a hornet's nest in the first place and then you will not sit around wondering why your having a bad day. [laughter] >> i would like to propose a round of applause. [applause] thank you all for coming. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> coming up on c-span, joe

biden and dr. joe biden at the national education association's annual meeting. here is a book. >> no. look. >> let me get to the point. you are under full-blown assault. mitt romney and his allies in the congress, their plan for public education is let the states use title $1 to boost enrollment in public schools. i am not looking for boo's. we should have a straight, honest to god talk, about the difference between how president

obama and ibm education -- and i view education and how our republican colleagues viewed it. a lot of you know me pretty well. where is delaware? hello, delaware. i am not prejudiced but they're probably the best educators in the world. seriously. governor romney is a good decent family man. it intentions are all positive. i do not make any moral judgments. i do not judge noted. i assume he cares as much about america and the education system as i do. the truth of the matter is that we have a fundamentally

different view. when i said he would like to take title 1 money, give it to the states, and let them use it to increase the boys of private schools, strip you of your boys because he does not think that you all know much about it, he characterizes you as not caring about the students but caring about yourselves. my jill is a literal when she says teaching is not what she who she is. these guys tonight get that. i think they do not understand why you chose to teach in the first place. i honest to god do not think they understand. by the way, like in politics, in

business, religious hierarchies, there are good teachers and lousy teachers. we are no different than any other profession in the world. but we are a profession. profession. you chose to be teachers because you care. you chose to be teachers because you want to make this country better. you chose to be teachers because you know every child is entitled to do what they can.

get it. they do not get why you chose this profession. i am not even sure. they do not get it. i see can see all of the vice president's remarks tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. yesterday the head of the national education association opened the conference by calling on members to reelect president obama. the speech focused on the changing demographics of students and criticisms students are facing a tough economic times. he called on teachers to "raised their game on professionalism and teaching." is your suggest over 20 minutes. correct to me the purpose of

public education -- this is just over 20 minutes. >> the purpose of education is needed for all. public education make america strong, studying history and civics. it helps students become good citizens, part of a democratic republic. public education is the people to teach american values and ideals. values like a just society, equal opportunity, and democracy. in a nation where equal opportunity is one of our most deeply held values, education is the key that opens the door to economic opportunity for people from all backgrounds. that is why top leaders from thomas jefferson to martin luther king jr. to president obama have understood the

importance of education in our society. another obvious answer to the why question is student learning. the academic side of education. to fit the confines of a -- not to fit the confines of a standardized tax, but the curriculum that includes arts, sports, drama, a science. the whole world of possibilities to explore. a whole universe to inspire our students. education to prepare young people for the future. help them discover their passion. their is more. there is more to education and academics. when we talk about the why a public education, the purpose, we have to address the needs of the whole child. that means issues like health care, good nutrition, safe

schools and family environments. all of these things impact learning answered and development. we are an adult and natural's life. we never know where we might have an impact on their development berbera puts a person. we have to see them as more than a student and a desk. one year i ask all of my high school students to each write me a letter about their goals for my class, their aspirations. please tell me one thing i do not know about you that you think i should. that night as i was reading 160 letters written just for me, one jumped out and grabbed me.

i remember where she sat. she was not doing particularly well. we were six weeks into the school year. in her letter she said, one thing he does not know about me is that my dad died at two weeks before school started. i know school is important, it is hard to feel that right now. times like that, academics, sure they are important. that is not all the student needs. sometimes kids just need somebody to listen, to understand, to encourage. you know those things cannot be measured on a test where you bubble and an answer. [applause] all of the issues i mentioned,

we cannot address all of them ourselves. what we can do is create partnerships and work with other people to meet all of those needs. we cannot set education policy by ourselves but we do have the power to influence. one way is through the polical process. we are going to talk a lot about that over the next few days because the election this year, public elect -- public education is critical and is the turning point for the middle class in america. the first item on that list, we have to do everything we can to re-elect president barack obama. [applause] president obama has earned our support in his first term. more than 400,000 educators working with students. he expanded access to health care to 30 million americans

through the affordable care act which, thankfully, was up held by last week's supreme court. [applause] he issued an executive order to open the door of opportunity to hundreds of thousands of students who are eligible for the dream act. just last week he led the way to ensure student loans remain affordable. we know the other side will outspend us in this election. we cannot allow them to outworked us. we will re-elect president obama. are you ready? [cheers and applause] yes, we must engage in the political system. that is not enough. to help students succeed in the challenging times we must also

harness the strength of our associations to take charge of the teaching profession. we need to support our members to define what good teaching looks like so others cannot reduce good teaching to standardize test. we cannot allow that to happen. we must have a real say -- a real say in how educators are prepared, trained, and evaluated. we are all leaders in our union and in our profession. we know how to bargain for a contract, how to mobilize our members for any election, how to advocate for legislation. we needed to keep doing all of those things with the attacks that are coming, we must do it and do it well. my question to you is this. are we willing to assert our leadership and take

responsibility for our professions. the demands of our work are changing as are students change. the world around us is changing ever so fast. i say it is time for us to lead the next generation of professionals in leading the next generation of students. i am so tired of others defining solutions without ever asking. those who do the work every day in their professional life. i want to take advantage of this opportunity for us to lead. i am not going to ask folks on the outside for permission. i will not ask if i get to do this. if we are not ready to lead, i know there are many others

ready, willing, and waiting to do it for us. maybe i should say do it to us. there are plenty of people outside our profession who have their own ideas about what we should be doing, how we should be evaluated, and how we should improve public education. their ideas like privatization, unregulated charters and vouchers. frankly, our current system allowed the market for those ideas to exist. we are part of that system -- a system that has not successfully addressed the dropout crisis. it has allowed kids who are in port to be in schools that do not meet their needs. to be placed in a classroom year after year with the least qualified and least experienced teachers. it is not enough to say most teachers are good. if there is one classroom with a

teacher who is not prepared or qualified, we cannot accept that. this country is not about equal opportunity for most, it is about equal opportunity for all. [applause] let me be clear, this country is not about all the educational opportunity you can afford -- it is about all the educational opportunities our country can provide, not for some but for all students in america. [cheers and applause] we proudly stand for equity. when we say equity, we are not talking about the bain capital

private equity corp.. when we talk about equity, we are saying that every child, a greatassroom teasers teacher and a great support professionals. if the solutions they are attempting to impose on us to not work for students we serve, we must take the responsibility to define solutions that do work for every student. collective powers to raise the level of preparations for those coming into our professions. let's improve the practice of those already there. we are professionals. professionals are always looking for ways to raise their game. we know and cheering students success in the fast-changing economy requires more from all

of us. i know that teachers are willing to take responsibility for student's success, and they want a voice in how they are trained, supported, and evaluated. let's demand every educator receive the professional development and support they need to help students succeed. instead of waiting for somebody to tell us what the teacher -- how to do our jobs, let us be the change we are waiting for. let's lead a movement for new academic standards. let us define the measures of professional practice, evidence of student learning, we needed them both. let's learn to use data and technology in new ways. we will hear this week about a

great program through which educational support professionals are visiting student's homes, building relationships with parents and they are using data to fly the problems, design interventions, and track progress. we will hear about a project using technology to teach sciences with embedded assessments so teachers know in real time when students do not understand a point. these are just a couple of the many examples of what our hat -- what is happening around the country. our affiliates are leading the way to improve the lives of students. that excites and energizes me. it gives me hope because i know the power of this union. the world has changed and society is asking more of us. our country needs more from us. we do not have to do it alone. why should we do it?

because we have each other. we can do things together that none of us could possibly do by ourselves. not only that, we can do things nobody else can do. yes, we need help from parents, communities, business leaders, and we will work hard to create real partnerships with them, especially in the ethnic minority communities. we educate america. there are some things we and only we can do. we must do them. a few weeks from now, the class of 2025 will enter kindergarten. imagine. almost 4,000,005-year olds. can you see their faces?

can you see that incredible diversity? the eagerness to begin. the joy of getting to attend school. i know one of them quite well. his name is mason. my youngest grandson. just as i did so many years ago, his parents, my son and daughter-in-law are entrusting him to us. they are putting his future in our hands just as the parents of 4 million other children will be doing. it is a long way from that first day in kindergarten until they graduate from high school. success. we need to find a way to help

them what we are doing is not working. the world will keep changing. the challenges are immense. the demographics of this group, they reflect the increasing diversity of our nation. technology, they have grown up using devices that i could not even imagine when i began teaching. i bet there are some of you in this room who are like me when i started teaching, we still had slide rules. remember those? and the careers? we cannot even fathom what kind of work many of them will do. as these students navigate through this changing world, i hope we will constantly monitor their needs to help them stay on course. i hope we will adapt and try whatever tactics are necessary to reach everyone of them. i hope we will be willing to

push ourselves to get better every day. i hope we will do these things because the dreams of these children are riding on us. yes, it is a big responsibility. is not a burden. it is a joyous responsibility that we readily embrace. we are 3 million strong and we are the greatest power in the world. the power to change lives. power.se that let's use our power of individuals and use our power through our collective strength, the power of 3 million people working together with passion and commitment to improve the lives of all of our students. let's use our power to change one classroom at a time. let's use power to make public education stronger. let's use power to make our nation a better place, moving ever closer to our great and noble ideal of equal

opportunity, not just for a fortunate few but for every single child. we educate america. thank you for all you do for the students of our country. thank you very much. [applause] hm >> here is a look at the prime- time lineup tonight beginning at 8:00 eastern. on c-span vice-president joe biden and jill biden at the national education association's annual meeting. on c-span 2, "book-tv" looking at the presidency. on c-span 3, american history tv

with oral history interviews with key congressional staff charged with investigating president nixon. that is all to 9 on the c-span networks. tomorrow on the fourth of july schedule, it will begin at 10:00 a.m. with a congressional gold medal ceremony for the montford point marines. there were stationed at the segregated montford point camp. house and senate leaders take part in the ceremony. tomorrow evening, the history of the statue of liberty. the beginnings, controversies, and changing meanings of the american symbol. >> for anybody who knew about it, they thought about it where

star wars was filmed. it came on the radar and protests began getting planned in different countries. i started taking the techniques i used to indonesia and expanded on them and improve upon them until i got to the point where my twitter followers became a newsroom. rather than being in the studio as an anger would with producers left and right -- as an anchor with producers left and right, i was sitting on a park bench with my phone having dozens of twitter followers killing those roles for me so i could do coverage of these revolutions and that fact check. >> you can watch is even as part of our july 4 prime time. it includes a discussion on the history of the statue of liberty. commencement speeches from cory booker.

it begins at 8:00 eastern on c- span. >> this week on washington journal, we have been taking a closer look up for news operations in the united states. we will talk to a representative of cctv and friday bbc america. today we will turn the spotlight on the german broadcaster deutsche welle. it is all over the world. tell us about your region with

the mission as. >> from german english, what ever you want. about 1500 people are working in berlin, that is where the company is based. it is public funded here we have 270 million at euro per year. that is approximately $348 million fee. host: and your staff here? guest: we have staff in an office here. it is not too far away from here

but it is not to -- we have staff in our office here. it is not too far away from here. host: the big story out of germany is the euro economic crisis. how is that story playing out for you? what is your role as far as giving it context? guest: i think many people are very curious where this crisis is coming from. the euro is stronger than the dollar. the dollar was stronger when the euro started 10 years ago and now the euro is about $1.26 a this morning. it is a debt crisis because many countries in the europa a zone, especially in the south like greece, spain, and italy, just spent too much money and living beyond their means. germany is doing well economically and their unemployment rate is 5.5%. germany is doing very well as we try to help the rest of europe. host: you in the washington

bureau cover all kinds of stories that generate here and send them out to audiences around the world. let's take a look your english- language broadcast covering the supreme court health care ruling last week. >> outside the high court, the legislation erupted in cheers as the ruling was made public. government-run health care has been a contentious issue for decades, an emotional one for both sides. at the heart of the matter is whether americans can or should be forced to purchase health insurance. there is also the issue of federal vs. state rights. opponents of the legislation also out in force. they expressed profound disappointment. >> i am shocked. i am absolutely shocked to. >> far from resolved, health care will be a major campaign theme of the 2012 presidential race. the republicans vowed to repeal and replies.

>> what the court did not do on its last day in session i will do on my first day, if elected president of united states and that is i will act to repeal obama care. host: what sort of stories are you file it from the united states and what is the interest? guest: we are covering almost everything. the election is a big issue for us. decision making in congress or rather not decision making in congress -- climate change, i traveled to west virginia to do a story about mining, human rights issues from child labor to guantanamo and in immigration law. my friends in germany just asked me if this can be true that you are in washington and the capital of the u.s., the richest country of the world, and you don't have power? tell us more about that.

host: how does your focus get tailored because of your german routes and your audience when you do a story about climate change? is there a different look that would be different from american news? host: yes, guest: yes, the majority of american politicians say there is no climate change. when you talk too german politicians or two germans, they will say there is climate change. when i traveled to west virginia and do a story about mining, people are just astonished that things like that can happen in this country, blowing away mountains just to get coal that is under those mountains cheaper and then trying to rebuild the mountain, as i have seen, and does not work really good. in utah to the guys who live there and they say we don't like doing that but -- then you talk to the guys who live there and they say we don't like doing

that but that is our living. many people in europe do not expect to see that here in the u.s. host: we are talking with mio soric the washington bureau chief of deutsche welle here in washington. let's hear from an independent scholar in illinois. caller: i thank -- i think it is the way the americans see it that germany has been under a lot of scrutiny for greece and

other countries because you guys are doing so well. from the way i see it, i think it's unfair to you because you guys are doing good or it seems like you are. i want to hear what you have to say about that. guest: thank you for your call. i think germany is always trying to help the others as good as they can. what might be dangerous is that the people overestimate the strength of germany. germany can belt out greece but faded as greece and spain and italy, it is too much for us. those countries have to do their homework and germany is trying to help as good as we can. host: talk more for us about how your network has covered the euro's own crisis -- the euro zone crisis. as we have watch what happens

in europe, summon a countries were caught flatfooted. -- so many countries were caught flatfooted. did the german press build up to this? i was there an understanding that this was going on? guest: germany wants really to help and is doing that. germany is a powerful machine in europe. without germany's strength, i think you're would be much weaker. germany is not strong enough to pay all the bills in europe. it is just too much. very often i read in the american newspapers that they try to put pressure on germany saying that germans should spend more and go deeper into debt. this might be the interest of many countries, and maybe also

from the u.s. because of germany is going to spend more, they might also buy more american products and this might be good for the american economy. president obama would be reelected. this might be the interest of the white house. germany has a demographic problem. if we don't have enough children. if we start to go too deep into debt and our economy gets weaker, this would be bad for germany but also for the rest of the world. host: texas, on our independent line, good morning. caller: how were you doing? the bush administration, they were going to create jobs by letting companies cut power. threeband's pay cut was hours which we came to 100 $40 per week which at the end of the year, we're making $6,700 less per year and that was

supposed to create jobs her which it didn't. what do you think about the misleading information the american people get for our news media? people here get mad over raising taxes on the rich people here. they're not thinking about the middle-class people. guest: thank you for your call. i am only guest of this country. i have lived here a couple of years and i don't feel i should be the one to give you a piece of advice on what should be done in the u.s. ijust don't know but what think is important and what is part of the strength of the german economy is that we have a very, very good educational system. universities are for free, the schools are very good. we will never be as cheap as

the people in china or india. we cannot produce that cheaply because their wages are higher but we have to be smarter. to be successful is very important to have good schools. i think you can't do it here in america as well. -- i think you can do it here in america as well. adjusted a story and that is something i really adore in america thecan do approach, the optimism. the americans always have a glass fault but in germany is the opposite. i have done a story about a public school here in anacostia, the marshall academy. the story was interesting because i just went through where the best public schools

are in the u.s. and i just saw one of the best public schools is in anacostia, i don't want to offend anybody, but one of the worst parts were you can live because there are so many poor people. i was very curious why it was one of the best public schools is in anacostia. i went there and law students from the university decided to build a school and they have done it and it is a fantastic school and many people gave the money to do that. this can-do approach that you americans have i think can make everything possible. to go back to your question, america might consider investing more in education. host: let's hear from an independent scholar in, a

tulsa, okla. their caller: i had a comment on the previous commentator. there is a dirty little secret across america that places like texas are used for education. -- that taxes are used for education and to build roads. how important and how many military bases are in germany and how important is that to the german economy? host: you mean american military bases? caller: yes. guest: thank you for the question. there's a huge military base not too far away from frankfurt. it is important for us to have the americans there. we are both members of nato and we are fighting together in afghanistan.

we try to help america anyway we can in the balkans as well. we think we are good partners and i think is good that american soldiers are in germany. nevertheless, many of them are leaving right now. we just have to deal with that. host: what role did the u.s. play in creating deutsche welle after world war two? guest: the americans and the british and to some extent of the french played in a poor role but the most important was was the one from the u.s. after world war two, when american troops were in west germany, they understood how dangerous it is when the government has influence on the

media. they built up a system where government has no influence on the media. it is impossible at one of those politicians in berlin, for example, would call me or the editor in chief and tell us what we should do. i think we are very grateful for this piece of advice that americans gave us after world war two. they had seen what propaganda can do during the time when the nazis ruled in berlin host: cincinnati, ohio, on our democrat line. caller: i have two comments. i wanted to tell the young man -- if i want to get really good foreign news, i use deutsche welle, i use the bbc world service. i like reuters.

i did plug into the russian news service and now that they have their own, i am able to get pretty good information from there. i think what most americans have to do is open their minds a little bit and have no problem about using foreign and new services. usually, especially in the case of the bbc and deutsche welle, they are more complete and much more circumspect. i have to disagree with you on my second point about the american stance or why americans are against angela merkel's not giving money to europe.

my mother is in her 80's and said after the war that the u.s. taxpayer went in and through the marshall plan raise your back up to where it had been before, at least part of the way. when i talked to her and myaunt, they seemed to think they could understand german frugality but by the same token, some of the country's particularly in greece who suffered as late doing the work -- you read "the london time "and other papers that there is an undercurrent. the answer is still there. i think these countries feel that maybe the germans should not be so hard and be more

forgiving. i don't think is something that would benefit the white house but i believe that we did it and what is the problem with germany? host: one issue was going back into history and talking about the marshall plan. and whether or not germany owes the rest of europe at this point. guest: i think the best thing she said it was at the beginning when she called me young man. i have not heard that for a while so thank you for that. i think germany helped and is still helping grease a lot. i went to greece very often in my life. i went about 40 times at least. i love greece. i love their monasteries. i am spending quite a lot of time there.

i see what they do with european money. very often, this is not very effective. germany is helping greece and will continue to do that but the greeks themselves have to do their homework. i think it is necessary that people work until they're 60-65 or 67 like we in germany. it is always difficult for you to explain that we have to help somebody who will retire. you expect from your own able to work until they're 67 even the retirement is at 55. everybody has to do his homework and be sure that your help in the past will continue. we are grateful in germany that america is helpless after world war two. we are grateful that there was the marshall plan.

the americas expected us to do our homework and become did grumman cats or reliable partners and much more. we have done that but when we help other countries in the southern part of europe, it is also in our interest that we have to expect that they will do their homework. as i said, germany will never forget what america has done for it. >> this is from twitter -- guest: if i knew all that, i would be a very rich man. this is the aim of the german policy is that greece will stay in the euro zone. if greece is going to leave, we will nevertheless continue to help greece.

we will not let them down. i just don't know whether greece will be in the bureau's own two or three years from now. host: let's take a look of some details about deutsch wrote well-off as we talk with their washington bureau chief. it is headquartered in bonn and the main americanhub is in washington, d.c.. tells what deutsche welle means. guest: deutsche means germans we andlle means a wave. it was short way programming

first in the german language to reach all the germans who left germany for whatever reason. they were here in the u.s. or somewhere in argentina or many other countries. they were interested in was going on in germany and after world war two, we had to invest in our image. we had to do something to explain that there is a new democratic germinate. for that reason, we started our program. the majority of the world population does not speak german so we thought might be a good idea to do the sampling in german -- in english and russian and many other languages. >> already is it's the icing 50s. you can get it via satellite and became a 24-hour news service in 1996. it is available on-line and you can see the website. we are seeing images of some of

the store is being covered and concede the german news as well as international news. >> yes, i must take my ipad because i don't see what you see a i see outside regrets. financial news is still important and the euro crisis will continue and will report on greece as well. host: our republican line is next. caller: i am disappointed because i heard him make the same tired worn out statement that people are gas climate change. the sec -- a contention is over the impact. now that the german people have been forced to pick up the pieces, are they ready to admit that socialist welfare states don't work?

are they mcqueary about how poor they have gone down that road? germany is doing well only because they are not tied up with the rest of the european problem. that have been of capitalism there that they are surviving. guest: thank you for your question. germany is a welfare state. everybody has insurance. i can say that our health care system works very well. it is half as expensive as the one that you have here in the u.s. i think it is less bureaucratic. i had some experience how works in the u.s. i don't want to tell you the way you should organize your health care system but i can tell you that the one that we have in germany works very well.

once again, both can go to deborah, strong government that -- together, strong goverhment that supports the economy and the free, as well. if both work together, government and the economy, that would be the perfect world. host: our guest mio soric. he also served as the head of the central and eastern european service and head of russian service. a question from michelle -- guest: they don't last so long. i am very curious who will make it. the majority of europeans like

obama very much. he seems to be a kind of anti- bush and want to cheer whether bush has always made the right decision. we just have to a knowledge that president obama has dialogue to improve americans' and the world. we like him very much. nevertheless, we're curious who is mr. romney. we just don't know him. it was just explain to me who he was. i don't know the outcome. i think it will be tight. i will travel to the battleground states. at a bid to ohio and florida, virginia and i'm curious as to who will win the end. host: will you be at the conventions? guest: yes.

this is a huge show. we are trying to copy this in germany but we cannot do it. you americans do host: that better from sarasota, fla., on our independent line. caller: the previous caller referred to the gentleman as young and he definitely is young. i am 76. my father was the principal at hines junior high school for 35 years and i could look at the capital of the united states looking out his window but the call i am making today is to ask -- what do you think the steps would be for us to get the same underground wiring system that they have in germany? i have been to germany eight times and i would be their right this minute set by canada for the $1.26 exchange rate for a euro. -- i can't afford the exchange rate for the euro.

i dearly love the country and i think it is fantastic you can speak two languages. i am learning german right now on my on. dr. crowell in sarasota is my instructor. it is a fabulous country and you're a fabulous reporter, thank you. guest: thank you very much. i apologize for my bad english. i have a piece of paper here with all the things i wanted to say. everything moves so fast i did not get the chance. i suppose it is because my bad english. i am giving interviews from time to time but we have native speakers. if you watch our program, you listen to native speakers give from america, great britain, australia or new zealand. my relationship to the english- language is like to the one of

my wife -- i love it but i don't have full control over it. doon't know what you should in the u.s. to improve your infrastructure. i just know this is a smart thing and a good thing to do because having a good infrastructure means also you will help your businesses. i learned that president obama at least wants to put more money into improving and rebuilding your infrastructure. when we talk to our german friends in washington, there are several thousand germans that live here in the suburbs, we just say we don't understand why americans are rebuilding, put some -- putting some money into improving eyes. they also said -- should start to invest their own country so you are right. as i said, a guest of this

country and i will not give advice to americans. host: a caller asked about the interconnectedness of germany and asked about the infrastructure, internet, wireless. compare the two, the united states vs. germany and what made it a priority? >> you need a strong government that wants to do that. i don't want to offend anybody but our infrastructure in germany is better. not only in germany but switzerland or the netherlands, the scandinavian countries are better. we put more money into our infrastructure. i just tried to think what would happen on dry -- happen in germany of someone had power out for more than five minutes and now we have here in the suburbs of washington for several days. i adore your patience. you say that's the way it is

and you cannot do a lot about that. in france, we would have a french revolution. host: the scale is so different looking at the size of germany and the size of the u.s.. do you feel the country is fairly wired and is internet connected? what is the sense of how accessible that is? guest: i think it is easier to do all that and a smaller country like germany than in the u.s. the task you have is larger but you have shown in the past that you can't do it. it is not the first time that america is building a good infrastructure. america can do it and everybody knows that america can do it. the only thing they need is a political leader. they say is important for the

economy and less to do it and i'm sure the americans can do that. it is more difficult to do it right i can compare a little bit because i live for a little while in russia which is even bigger than the u.s. a large country like russia or india or china or the u.s., you just need a strong state, a strong political elite who say we are going to invest in our interest. host: mio soric is the washington bureau chief of deutsche welle news service. let's hear from west virginia, a democrat. caller: good morning. i would like to make a comment and ask a question and then get a reply. thank you to the gentleman from

germany wave from coming to west virginia and doing a story and mountaintop removal. we tried to get cspan to do a story on mountaintop removal on numerous occasions. i personally have vast on numerous occasions. i am interested as to what his opinion is when he comes on a national news program and the first words that he says is that he goes to west -- jack and visits a mountaintop removal and he is trying to understand why our government would allow something like this to happen. our state is being destroyed. our peoples help was being destroyed. we are being used as a column, like an african nation. i would like to hear what he thinks about that.

i would like to ask a follow-up question if i may, thank you. guest: it was interesting for me to see what happened in west virginia. i have to confess that i did not expect that i have spoken to families. they told me that is how we make our living and we don't like to do that but that is that we make money. then somebody told us that is different to europe. if you own a piece of land here, this is your land and you can do with it whatever you want. this is a little bit different. i like the people in west virginia. they were very nice, great hospitality down there. thank you. i really like the people there.

host: do you have something else to follow up with? caller: i would like to ask cspan to do a segment on mount top mining. of like to tell everyone that i am a retired coal miner. he added that question with the fact that if they owned the land bridges because you owned the land does not give you the right to poison everyone downstream. it does not give you the right to destroy the ecosystem that has been here for 300 million years. i would like to see cspan and the u.s. government do something about mountain top removal mining. host: let's go on to a democratic caller in california caller: good morning. it is hard to follow on the guy that just spoke. the economy and monetary policy - what you think germany would

be right now if the euro had never come about? guest: that's a very good question. many germans have asked this question. they say we want to have our good old deutsche mark back. nevertheless, it was a good decision to have bureau. -- have the euro. we had to pay the price for to live in peace of their neighbors. we tried to learn from history. we have to help each other. solidarity is important. hasn't forget that germany nine neighbors and there is no other country in europe that has so many neighbors. we want to live in peace with the them. if they are strong, if poland is strong, if france's strong, all those countries are economically strong, they will

buy our products. this again is good for us. it is a win-win situation for that reason. that's why it is a good reason to have a europe. many germans are concerned as to what germany would look like if we had the deutsche mark. i think we are a nation that makes their living by exporting greg wiest to produce machines and cars and other things. we need people who are going to buy that. about 50% or 60% of our goods, people buy in europe. is it our interest that greece, italy and spain and all those countries where it had problems that they will succeed and solve them -- their financial problems. host: deutsche welle is

regulated by a public law and financed by several tax revenues. our guest talks about a fire wall between editorial decisions and the government. the annual budget this year is about to ordered 71 million euros. let's hear from a republican lawyer -- caller in cleveland, ohio. caller: bank of taking my call. -- thank you for taking my call. i was curious ithe eu. you started to answer regarding the creation of the eu. perhaps it was ill-conceived putting the cart before the horse. it has so many diverse political systems, banking systems, and market. that problem still has not been resolved. i am curious why the united kingdom is still reluctant to be a full partner with the eu. they don't want central banking system. it seems that is a real dilemma and the problem for a weaker

nation. i am all also capitalism is trying to eliminate jobs in certain areas. our urban ghettos are sacrifice does breed is this the future for europe creating sacrificed zones and so you have countries that are very strong at the expense of countries that become very weak? guest: i think she led a spriggs out -- i think she's a lot of smart things. she is following what is happening in europe. there are lot of problems we have in europe, not only the banking system that is a different culture in the south and in the north. what means were to you? is and work everything? germans like to work hard. work is important but it is not everything. how you bring those things

together is a matter of mentality, the different view and perspective on what is life and what is important in life. they said the europe would not work from the beginning more than 10 years ago. we're solving our problems with the bureau. wi --th the euro. it is better than having a war like we have seen in the past in europe host:. do you have strong lobbying groups in germany? guest: not as strong as you have here in washington, a d.c. we have lobbying groups but they don't have the influence that your group 7 washington.

host: mio soric, washington bureau chief of deutsche welle. it is dw.de. thank you for being here. >> today for a specific reason i want to focus on two men in my life that were at my graduation and they would like to be here for today. they could not make the trip. these two men are my dad and my grandfather. they taught me what it means to be a man. they both are these outrages there's with the corneous jokes imaginable. -- corniced jokes imaginable. my grandfather, this big a man would say, you see,