hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & co." here is what is coming up. 33 days without a paycheck for federal workers. former vice president al gore joins me. also ahead, president trump transgender troop ban. reaction from a trans captain in the u.s. military. and capturing the human cost of war.

speaking to the serious correspondent for the associated press. sarah el deeb. uniworld is a proud sponsor of "amanpour & co." uniworld, bee's locally inspired cuisine. according to bee, to travel is to eat. booking available by your travel advisors. >> additional support has been provided by rosalind p. walter. bernard and irene schwartz. sue and edgar wachenheim iii. the cheryl and philip milstein judy and josh weston.

ask by cob trntributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> polls show americans are largely blaming president trump for the largest government shutdown in american history. here is what some of them had to say at a food bank in new york. >> the country as great as this country is, and we should be more intelligent, and thinking more intelligently. the whole world is looking at us like we are kids. this is what kids do. i had to get some type of help from other family and friends to help me out as well as food run here. >> now in an attempt to end the

shutdown, the senate will take two votes. they are both expected to fail. we will wait to see. the former vice president and presidential candidate al gore lived through his own fair share of government shutdowns. he is telling me that the world economic forum that we are running out of time. he says that president trump is out of step with his own young republicans on this issue and he is in danger of being the world's poster boy for climate change denial. welcome to the program. >> thank you for having me. >> it is clear that the president of the united states has not arrived because of the shutdown. as a former vice president,

congressman, senator, you worked through many, many shutdowns. what do you think is going to break this impasse? >> well, i don't know. i think that of course you will hear this through a partisan filter because you know, i used to be a democratic office holder, but i sincerely believe that he needs to open the government up and then negotiate on other matters. there are two things different. number one, president trump declared in advance of the shutdown that he would take full credit for it or blame that it was his shutdown. and he announced that in advanced. the second thing that is different is, just beforehand, the house and the senate and large bipartisan majorities passed legislation to keep the

government open that was supported by president trump and then right wing broadcasting types that he is evidently very, very sensitive to, criticized him to do that and he reversed field right away. and so the solution comes out of that history. he needs to open up the government and start good faith negotiations. >> he is clearly been blamed for it by the population. and we have been covering the absolute pain and suffering that government workers are going through furloughed, working without pay, having to do yard sales and even food stamps potentially not being there to help people that. in that regard, it is also precedent making. >> yes it is. and it is a horrible way to treat these hardworking public

employees. it is embarrassing for our country, the embarrassment is nothing compared to the hardship and difficulty these families are experiencing. so he needs to re-open the government. >> you met president trump before he was inaugurated. you had a climate meeting with him at the suggestion of his own daughter and advisor, ivanka. tell me how do you feel he was going to pursue the issue of climate? >> well, i continued talking with him during the first half of his first year after he went into the white house. i'm a little old fashion in protecting the confidence of any presidents and i got into that habit for eight years when i worked in the white house. i had some hope that he would come to his senses and change his mind, but i was wrong, he didn't. >> at the same time a strange

c confluence is happening in the united states. you see poll numbers moving. all parties believe this to be a very, very significant issue. 51% say they are sure global warming is happening. 72% say climate change is an issue important to them. that is up. in that regard are you optimistic that those people can put enough pressure on politics, particularly politics at the top. >> yes i am. i am optimistic overall. we are running out of time. and the emissions have started going up again. we are putting hundred million tons into the sky every day as if it is an open sewer. and the accumulated amount now

traps as much extra heat, energy in our system every day as would be released by 500,000 hiroshima atomic bombs exploding every hour. that is a lot of energy. what you are seeing with these recent polls with an all time record high number of americans in both political parties, saying this is serious. you are seeing not so much the result of advocates like me and others working hard on this as you are seeing the results of the messages sent by mother nature. every night on the television news it is like a nature hike. look at the fires in california, the massive floods, the hurricanes. even today the drought in india. these records are being set.

the five hottest years ever measured. 18 of the 19 hottest years have been in the last 19 years. this is really crystal clear. and people get it. few people who think the moon is landing is fake. the earth is flat. overalls publics are moving rapidly to demand solutions. >> yet, all that you said, it clearly doesn't impact president trump still, even january, 20th, that is just this past week, he said yet again in response to people complaining with this, be

careful, try straying aying in house. wouldn't be bad to have a little good old fashion global warming right now. so still not taking it seriously. or at least addressing the issue in this hoaxian fashion of this. and of course, there are a lot of americans who still support him. i respect those americans. i understand their desire to disrupt things the way they were going. i get all of that. but i think, donald j. trump has becoming the global face of climate denial. and that in itself is causing a lot of people to say, whoa, i don't want to be associated with that. i don't want to be associated with him. or those views. i think that is actually one of the factors that is driving these record numbers showing americans at an all time high in demanding solution for the climate crisis.

and again, you know, you made a huge impact when you did "inconvenient truth." and you got all of the stories. i'm afraid it was doom and gloom showing the worst impact of all of this and the denials as well. now, it looks like people are trying to persuade people. they won't lose their quality of life and understand about solution. almost about a second wave climate care movement going on and yet, it takes government action. so we have had the first epa administrator, scott pruitt who was really, really bad on this issue. and now we have the second one andrew wheeler. listen to what he said when bernie sanders was questioning him. >> do you agree with the scientific community that climate change is a global crisis that must be addressed in

an aggressive way? >> i believe that climate change is a global issue that must be addressed globally. no one country can -- >> that wasn't my question, sir. i don't have a lot of time and i appreciate you answer the question. scientific communities have said that climate change is one of the great crisis facing our planet. and if there is not unprecedented action to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to sustainable energy and energy efficiency, there will be irreparable damage in united states and virtually every country on earth. do you agree with the scientific community. >> i would not call it a global crisis. >> even if they thought it was a huge issue that has to be addressed globally, are they

doing enough to do their part to address the global solution? >> let's be clear. i know some of donald trump's supporters who are personally disappointed that he has not in fact drained the swamp as he promised to do. that meant to some that he is going to take the snakes and alligators into the swamp when he has been putting more snakes and alligators into the swamp. and not to call mr. wheeler a snake or an al gaiter. this revolving door has gotten much worse under donald trump. here is more of the good news. the fastest growing job in the united states is solar installer growing nine times faster.

the second fastest growing job is wind turbine. we have sustainable, the much higher levels of efficiency. it has the magnitude of the industrial revolution. it is creating jobs and cleaning up the air and water. now, we do need changes in policy because governments around the world are still subsidizing the burning of fossil fuel. that has to change. >> i mean, it is interesting hearing how this is sort of gal vanting ahead. what do you make of the president's belief in protectionism, and essential, you know, the trade war in china.

and i am asking you because you had that famous debate with ross perot. let's play and remind what you said in 1993. >> in 1930, when the proposal was to raise tariffs across the board to protect our workers and i brought pictures too. this is a picture of mr. smoot and mr. haully. they sounded reasonable at the same time. the congress passed smoot hawley protection bill.

now, i framed this so you can put it on your wall if you want to. >> thank you. thank you. >> i mean, honestly, that was pretty brilliant theatrics there and the substance was well taken as well. are you surprised that we are having the same debate all these years later? >> well, first of all, this has to be said. some of the trade practices of china have in fact have been unfair. and the digital piracy has to be stopped. however, that being said, listen to the president's own economic advisors, they are saying this trade war is having a dampening effect on economic progress. by the way, where nafta is concerned, know, the immigration from mexico is now negative. more mexicans are leaving the u.s. to go back to mexico than

are coming from mexico. why, because partly under nafta there was an opportunity to create more jobs there. the immigrants coming now are coming mainly from honduras, guatemala and he will s guatemala and he wiel salvador. that is one of the principles causes for them to make that long journey. we should have a sensible trade policy, correct the abuses and let's benefit from good equal and fair trade in both directions. let's also do in central america what we have done in mexico and that is to work with them to establish more jobs and more economic security so they are not driven away from their

homes. >> the supreme court, we have witnessed the supreme court getting new justice, brett kavanaugh. we have seen right now that the supreme court has upheld temporarily at least the ban on transgender in the military, i mean, from somebody who lost one of the most famous supreme court cases in modern time, bush versus gore, is the supreme court somewhere where the american people can have faith that it is a nonpolitical, you know, justice is blind. >> well, there have been a lot of decisions and citizens united

declared corporations to be people, and money to be speech, and we have seen the corruption of our political process with flows of money ever since get much worse. let me say this, as i said after the 2000 election and the supreme court decision, i will say again today, we cannot allow the perceptions of the american people of the supreme court to be through a partisan lens. respect for the rule of law is really a bedrock principle. we can disagree with opinions. i disagree on what they just said on transgender people. and all of their colleagues and comrades in arms saying, leave her alone, leave him alone. this is crazy. this is just a principle of fairness and like a lot of things, once you know someone who has gone through the life

experience, then the prejudice fades away. >> vice president gore, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> strong warnings there from the former vice president. and on the transgender issue, president trump tweeted a ban on transpeople serving in the military. the administration has come back with another version and the supreme court just this week has allowed it to go in effect while the case plays out. captain jennifer peace has served in new york and afghanistan and joins me now from washington. welcome to the program. >> thank you. >> you just heard former vice president, former presidential candidate al gore give a robust defense of your rights and

talking about the need for rule of law and impartial justice of the supreme court. i want to ask you to your reaction to the decision and to what al gore just said. >> the decision from the supreme court is disappointing and it brings out too major concerns that i have. even if the ban isn't implemented yet, what we are going to have are people that are serving are going before boards, be denied. if the leader says the president, and the supreme court agree that transgender is not allowed to serve. more long-term, i am concerned about the future of our military. the united states should be the most lethal fighting force in the world. i believe i fall in that quality. and many of my peers who happen

to be transgender fall into that category. no one is asking for special treatment, just to meet the standard. and if we are not given the opportunity, we are reducing the pool to military. >> look, let me ask you then, because with this new supreme court ruling, does that mean somebody like you automatically is not serving, are you furloughed, what is the deal with you and your colleagues? >> as far as i know, everyone who is currently in the military, will continue to serve until something more happens in the lower courts. the supreme court action, and i'm certainly only so educated on policy, but it looks like once a policy is published by the department of defense, it will be able to stop new recruits from joining the military and people going from enlisted to officer or moving in the military.

it won't have an immediate impact but long-term it will. >> you met with the previous administration about all of this and in the obama politician, the ban on trans was lifted and trans men and women were allowed to serve. what exactly is the basis for the trump administration's ban again? >> according to the policy and the information that was put out by secretary mattis, the main thing that they are companincer about is cost. the transition is incredibly low.

one-tenth on what the military currently spends on viagra medicine. i have deployed to iraq, afghanistan, japan, all around the world while transitioning and it hasn't had any impact. so one pregnancy from a female will actually put them out of unit readiness longer than a trans person's entire transition. that argument is not genuine. the other thing about unit cohesion, i have come out to so many people. i commanded a headquarters element while opening serving as a trans person. i have had so many people reaching out asking if there is any way they can help and we have seen that everywhere we have had trans service members come out. most people only know about trans persons from what they

have seen in the media and stereotype. once they know a trans person and see this is not this uncomfortable concept, about you your friends and coworkers, they realize it is not a big deal. >> it is like we have seen this movie before. same with gay members. don't ask don't tell. i suppose, i can't remember when they challenged their fitness physically and militarily to serve. but almost like we are going back to the future. this argument has already been waged and no disruptive results. >> i think that is a legitimate

concern. right now, trans people are joining the military. and multiple chiefs have spoken out and said no issues with trans people serving. if we take a step back, and i think that opens the doors. there was a time when blacks couldn't serves or women couldn't serve. there was a time when trans people couldn't serve. so instead of going back and reducing those rights, i don't think it is a huge argument to say the more we look at it, gays and lesbians shouldn't serve. >> there has been a documentary,

trans military, and one of your commanders was interviewed. and i am going to play a sound bite of what they were saying. >> if somebody asked me if captain peace serving in my unit was a social experiment, my report is clear and quick. i don't experiment with command positions. she was right for the job. her performance and her potential were outstanding and outpaced those of her peers. >> that is solid endorsement. give me the quick version of your experience in terms of transitioning. did you learn, how did your story unfold? >> i made the decision to start transitioning in 2014. a policy hadn't come into place yet, but i was a member of a

group called sparta. and after meeting with people and seeing with people that transitioned, i realized it was something that i needed to do on my own. i was outed to my unit in j january 2015. i established a relationship with my commanders and my peers. they relied on me. the policy said i should be discharged but they were looking for a way to keep me as a member of their union. so they certainly had all the reason to say if i wasn't qualified to continue serving that i shouldn't be in that unit that was preparing to be deployed any moment. but i made it through that. the man that i saw speaking there was colonel eisenhower.

he was incredible. he couldn't be more supportive. the only thing we should be discriminating on is performance and potential. and he also taught me, and one of the other reasons that i continue to speak out, is that army officers are not just valued to read regulations. we use our own values and stand up foro our own rights. >> captain jennifer peace thank you for joining us. >> this week suicide attack killed dozens of afghans and a u.s. army. this comes as president trump has raised the prospect of

pulling out half of the troops in afghanistan. chief executive, abdullah abdullah. welcome to the program. you have an opportunity to appeal now to the people, you know, in terms of staying the course in your country. what are you telling them? >> thank you christiane, it has been 18 years since the international community has enlisted in afghanistan. and at the same time the afghan people in the context of security has changed worldwide especially in our region, and a lot has been achieved in the past 18 years. for example, a few years back it was 150,000 international troops. now it is around 18,000.

so this shows the progress. and also if you are dealing with formidable enemies like al qaeda, taliban also now part of those groups, we need to be patient and we need to stay the course. and it is doable. the policy which was announced by president trump was welcomed in afghanistan as well as in the region and part of his word is it is conditioned base. of thos sacrifices in vain being in vain where tremendous progress has ean security challenges are not there. and these are all challenges that we need to place together

with the hope of better situation. >> so let me just take one by one. obviously the end of this is going to be some kind of political solution some kind of resolution. that means the taliban don't keep attacking the legitimate government forces and people of afghanistan. to that end, we hear that a new round of talks between the taliban and the united states has started. and i was speaking to the former u.s. defense secretary who felt that it was necessary to keep troops on the ground, u.s. troops on the ground while these talks are ongoing. let me play what he told me and get your reaction to it. >> afghanistan is worse off today than ever been. the mistake that trump has made in my opinion, right when we are trying to work on a diplomatic solution, and have diplomatic

representatives meeting with the taliban and others to try to find diplomatic solutions he talks about getting troops out. that is not the time to talk about troop withdrawal. >> i assume you agree with that. giving up leverage is what he was trying to say. what hopes do you have for this round of talks with the taliban. do you have any hope that there can be a political solution? >> until, before getting to this, i agree with chuck haggel. he is a good friend. and he tries very hard during his own term as secretary of defense. when it comes to the talks which are underway today, yes, if taliban think that tomorrow the u.s. troops will withdrawal, why

wouldn't they continue their heinous crimes against the people and campaign against all of us before dating that they can come back big deal. of course it is the prerogative of the president of the united states to make a decision about it. from what we hear about some of the details of the plan which is not as of yet being discussed in washington in details, but the hints about it. that it is not like complete withdrawal. it is not like abrupt and drastic decision. the u.s. representatives military and civilian, they keep assuring us that the engaging with afghanistan will continue until there is peace. and at the same time part of the south asia policy is that it is condition base.

the presence of troops are condition base. there are lots of lawmakers which are in the united states which believe in the same way and at the same time nobody wants to give the troublemakers in and around afghanistan to hope that they can divorce all of the achievements and turn it into another situation like prior to september 11. that they hosted osama bin laden. and that is the logic. at the same time when the president of the united states make a comment, one cannot take it for granted. >> so let me ask you this. let's hope for your sake that is what happens that there will be

condition base action. you heard also talk about mercenaries. and president trump said many times there is a transactional quality to what he, the way he is engaging around the world and why not have mercenaries, guns for hire to go to places instead of sending americans. i was speaking to general mccristol and this is what he told me about black water and that mercenary group. >> so eric prince, the founder of black water, his sister is betsy devos, he is proposing this plan where all american troops get replaced by mercenaries and he thinks that they can fix afghanistan. that is dangerous thinking. and worse than that, if the u.s. continues to do this, it legitimizes it for the rest of

the world. >> so he obviously doesn't think it is a good idea. and what do you think. and would afghanistan accept mercenaries or guns for hire, instead of american armed forces. >> i couldn't agree more with the gentleman which commented on this issue. the minute you turn something that we think is something part of global efforts in dealing with terrorism and different stability which has an impact on the rest of the world, the main, the minute we turn this into private enterprise, would you think that the people would be able to pay the high price they continue to pay? the average casualties on our soldiers on a daily base is

unacceptable. the fact that they think they are defending a legitimate government, legit government and values and preventing afghanistan from going back to the old days where men and women of the country were treated as sub human, that is the main motivation. the fight is between cruelty and rest of their life between our forces and our people in those forces which are fighting against us. when it comes to negotiations, it will start when taliban comes to the table with the afghan side. trying very hard. i'm not briefed about his recent visit to doha. it is not the people of

afghanistan, it is not the government, it is not the international partners. it is taliban. and to remind you, part of the south asia strategic was to deal with the sanctions which are critical now. it is important to deal with it. it is time to put real pressure on those who support taliban. >> we will have to talk more about that another time. i think you are referring to pakistan. we will do that another time. thank you for joining us. and we turn now to serious civil war.

it happens just after president trump declared them defeated and announced that he was going to withdrawal troops. sarah el deeb, she guided many conflicts on the ground and the human toll. >> syria is a place that has at least four different conflicts going on. but before we get to how those are playing out, what have you witnessed on the ground. what is life like there for syrians. >> it depends on which part of syria you are in. many conflicts and many stages. i have been able to access north syria for the most part where opposition and british and u.s.

and turkish forces are present. so in that area, in the northeast, it is a mix of devastation and potential. i think there are areas where there has been very aggressive and determined fights against some states, so cities and entire blocks as we have seen have been completely destroyed and that is the devastation that i am talking about. also areas that have been spared most of the conditiflict. so peaceful farmland and secure areas. and then the one thing that is inescapable in all of syria is displaced. in every area whether it was government area or opposition or whatever in this stage, you have a lot of people who have lost their homes and are living in squalid camps and destroyed buildings and maintain their

existence. so life it is a war zone. so life in a war zone is only going to be very difficult. >> well, we estimate about 4,000 people have been killed. estimates that almost half a population has been internally displaced or left the country. what does that do to a society when you have this happening sword of endlessly. >> eight years on, syria that was is no longer. and syria is one of the most diverse societies in the middle east. christians, muslims, kurds, it was a very mixed society that rarely find in the middle east. and i think that is no longer. you have, like you said, 200 people are estimated to have died. but we don't know if they are real numbers. it is difficult to keep track of

the killing. you have more than 100, an estimated of 100,000 people that are missing. we don't know where they are. they are in prison or under ground somewhere. 6 million people that left the country. and like i said, another 6 million that are moving about in different areas that are not their homes. so you can imagine this is a country that has been cut into piece, and i don't know how you can put that together if the conflict is still continuing until now. >> when it comes to territory, has assad retaken the land. >> 60% of the land. it is definitely better than it was three years ago. he has a lot of help from the a

allies. and also supportive of those, this has dissipated throughout the year. no longer the case. but he does not have control of the oil resources for instance which majority of them are concentrated in the east. a lot of water resources that are in also in the eastern and central part of syria. and i don't think he has control of the population. like i said, 60 million living abroad. and then you have six other living on the move. plus a percent of territory.

so he does, but there is still areas outside his control and i think so long as this is the case, there will always be unrest. >> let's talk about the second frame which is the turks versus the kurds fighting. >> i wouldn't describe it that way. i think turkey is concerned about the growing influence and sovereignty and autonomy, it has said that from the beginning and worked through curtail or prevent that. the kurds are looking for autonomy. they do appear, at times in the conflict, they did appear to be the biggest winner of this conflict. and i think that is changing. as i think turkey has worked to push them out of that area. it said it will, it is seeking

to establish a 20-kilometer safety zone and wants to push the kurds out of the area. >> let's put that in context of the united states versus the islamic state. how does that have an effect on that fight between the kurds and the turks? >> i don't think the u.s. ever opens it supports the autonomy entity. the u.s. is in there to fight against isis and found a partner in the kurdish forces. but it is also an ally, nato member like turkey. so always in a difficult condition to keep both happy. turkey wants the u.s. to work with turkey to fight isis in the area. and the u.s. did not find what it was looking for in the turkey

force or in the turkey prepared force to fight isis in that area. so i think it was always a very difficult situation, the u.s. was finding itself in. and i feel like we just pushed it down the road and now we have to deal with it. how are you going to work with turkey and still protect those partners that you worked with for four or five years to fight against openly. they feel shocked, worried and they feel like they put in a lot of efforts and fighters and relied on a partner that is going to leave them in a face of advancing enemy force.

i think they have not dropped the ball, i think from what i hear, they still trying to find a way to work with the americans to find a solution for their existence in the area. it is very complex situation and i don't know the ins and outs of the negotiations exactly to see how this is going to be able to work out. i don't see how turkey will accept any form of kurdish along their border. >> the president of the united states and the vice president have said isis is defeated. yet, we just had a bombing that killed 19 people including four americans, is that a sign from i isis that it is not done? >> clearly it is not done. it is there and able to carry out attacks. they are always incidents here and there. and there are still incidents.

also, security alerts and attacks attempted attacks. and i think territorily, it diminished. at one point in control of this whole section of syria and large sections of iraq. but i don't think we can say that the group is finished. i think the group is present and among population. i think they have a sliver of land still in the middle of southeast syria about 15 kilometers that we can identify clearly. but i think they are, they are still moving around. we haven't arrested the top leaders. we don't know where they have gone. there are still people that come out who are foreign fighters and families of the foreign families that are still moving with the refugee population. so i don't think the group is over obviously.

>> with all of this going on, what is the most pressing problems in syria? >> humans are the most pressing problems. you have people living in squaller conditions all over the place. under continued violence. you have potential conflict coming up. 3 million people live in that area among extremist groups and other groups. government is always threatening to have offense in that area. the british population living in the northeast of syria, where would they go? turkey makes statements about how it will protect and safe guard the lives and the livelihood of the kurds living in that area. but with all of the animosity that have developed in the

years, those people would have to flee somewhere. caught between two impossible situations. the sense of security that was developed over the last couple of years with the u.s. presence in the area. it is still a conflict zone. and there is still attacks here and there. but there was a sense of normalcy. a commercial time with nine or six soccer teams that play football. and trade between the east and the west. and these people, half of them, will have to find another place to live in there was with the looming offensive from either turkey or the government or just change event. i don't think the u.s. has to stay in syria forever. a negotiation for the fate of these people would probably

provide some sense of security and stability for people who have lived in conflict nor eight years. >> is that the effect, to give people in the region a sense of confidence? >> i don't want to overrate that, the importance of 2,000 troops. but i think they were presence that meant a certain degree of leverage. continued battle against elements of isis. and intelligence work that was to prevent the militants from regrouping. and the fact that members where, under constant threat of possible offensive, they were happy that they had their allies

there from taking place. there needed to be a negotiation. with pulling out, you don't have a card to negotiate. >> what are the ripple effects on the entire region. in jordan and turkey and lebanon. and seems to be a destabilizing force to these other countries. >> it has, it is a conflict in the center of the arab middle east with everyone else around interested in battling it out on that territory. it definitely is for spots in the middle east right now. >> you have been covering the middle east for a long time and based throughout the region. what has the last three years been like in covering this war for you. you go in and out of syria which can't be an easy situation either from a security perspective or as a woman going into the zones.

>> it was not possible for a long time to access syria. there was a period where most journalist could not go to syria and when we finally did, it was not, it is absolutely not easy, you have to travel by land, security preparation and go into areas where you don't know, there are no clear front lines like when isis was in the area and we had to cover the battle for raqqa for instance. they drop bombs on you. definitely, i would say that covering syria was one of the most challenging experiences that i had. security and also humanity, the extent of suffering in all parts of syria, it is just

unimaginable. it is always a challenge to try to convey this. people are tired of hearing what conflict and wars and displacement, but you cannot stop telling the story. this has real effects on real people. people are separated, future lost. having that has been, and you don't see an end in sight. and that has been a difficult aspect of covering this war. >> thank you so much. >> a heartfelt plea. that is it for our program tonight. thank you for watching "amanpour & co." on pbs and join us again tomorrow night. uniworld is a proud sponsor of "amanpour & co."

when bea tollman's 60 years began. locally inspired cuisine. according to bea, to travel is to eat. bookings available through your travel advisor. for more information. >> additional support has been provided by rosalind p. walter, bernard and irene schwartz, sue and edgar wachenheim iii, the cheryl and philip milstein family, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

lidia: buon giorno. i'm lidia bastianich has always been my passion. the kitchen is a beautiful place to be creative, so it's endless. you should give it all the love you've got. so join me and learn how to celebrate italian-style. it's gonna get better and better. tutti a tavola a mangiare! venite! announcer: funding provided by... crystal-blue seas, rocky coasts, and sandy beaches. national parks, ancient ruins, and historical sites. traditions still survive in calabria. at cento fine foods, we're dedicated to preserving the culinary heritage of authentic italian foods by offering over 100 specialty italian products for the american kitchen.