text:
Copyright© 2004, National Broadcasting Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
NBC News
Guests: Tom Brokaw, NBC News
Madeleine Albright, Former Secretary of State
Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker of the House
Sen. Mitch McConnell, (R-Ky.) Majority Whip
John Podesta, Former Clinton Chief of Staff
Ron Brownstein, Los Angeles Times
Gwen Ifill, PBS, "Washington Week"
Moderator/Panelist: Tim Russert - NBC News
This is a rush transcript provided for the information and convenience of the press. Accuracy is not guaranteed. In case of doubt, please check with:
(202) 885-4598, Sundays: (202) 885-4200
Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, June 27, 2004
MR. TIM RUSSERT: Our issues this Sunday: Iraq. This Wednesday, the Iraqis begin to govern themselves. But 138,000 American troops will still be on duty and in harm's way. What now? With us: the former secretary of state, Madeleine Albright; the former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich; the majority whip of the United States Senate, Republican Mitch McConnell of Kentucky; and former President Clinton's chief of staff, John Podesta. Albright, Gingrich, McConnell and Podesta square off over Iraq.
An anonymous CIA agent speaks out.
"ANONYMOUS" CIA ANALYST: A major problem with the Iraq War is that it distracted us from the war against terrorism.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: The new movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" plays to crowded theaters. And the Bubba book tour barnstorms America. How will all this affect the Bush vs. Kerry presidential race--128 days to go? With us: Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times and Gwen Ifill of PBS' "Washington Week."
But first, let's go live to Baghdad. We are joined by NBC's Tom Brokaw. Tom, on Wednesday, the turnover of self-government to the Iraqis. How tense is the situation in Iraq today?
MR. TOM BROKAW: Well, Tim, I think the most accurate way to describe it is that this is the storm before what they fear is an even larger storm that could be coming. The big worry here among all groups is that the insurgency now has very sophisticated what the military people call command and control. They could be joining up their groups and coordinating their attacks. We saw those simultaneous attacks across six cities earlier last week, and they don't know what to expect in the days before the turnover or immediately after. But I can tell you that there is a lot of tension here. At the same time, a lot of the people who are in the interim government, and even some people who've joined the new
army, say, "One year from now, we think we'll be in a lot better place." But as we have learned so often and so painfully in Iraq, it's hard to project 24 hours, much less 24 months in advance.
MR. RUSSERT: The new prime minister, Allawi, Tom, has said that elections may have to be postponed, that martial law may, in fact, have to be imposed. What are you hearing about that?
MR. BROKAW: Well, today I talked with Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, who is the most influential and prominent of the Shiite leaders, and also with Ahmad Chalabi, who's still here and still a player. And they both said, as prominent Shiites, you cannot postpone the elections, that, in fact, the one thing that the Iraqis have to look forward to is taking control of their own country. They think that that would be a prescription for disaster. In fact, it would be a victory for the insurgents. But again, it's very hard to know what will happen between now and next January, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: On Wednesday, do you believe that martial law will be imposed?
MR. BROKAW: I do think that there will be troops all over the streets here. The American forces are going to try to pull back into their garrisons. They'll use what patrols they can of the blue-shirted Iraqi police and the American patrols in strategic areas. But the White House is very determined that this week have what they're calling an Iraqi face. They want the Iraqi people to take control of their own destiny.
But there is that pragmatic concern: How do you secure a country the size of California that is effectively already caught in a form of a civil war? You have anarchy in areas like Fallujah, and the insurgents now able to strength throughout the length and breadth of this country, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: Bottom line, Tom: Is the Iraqi silent majority, if you will--are Iraqis now willing to step forward, emotionally, psychologically, and begin to fight other Iraqis, kill other Iraqis in order to put down the insurgency?
MR. BROKAW: I think that's the real test, Tim. I think that they're counting on here, both in the United States military command and what is left of the CPA, the Coalition Provisional Authority, and, for that matter, the new interim government--they're counting on the Iraqi people running out of patience, reaching a tipping point, if you will, and beginning to push back very hard. You know, the Shia have a very substantial brigade of their own called the Badr Brigade. I wouldn't be surprised if we begin to see them getting involved in the fight against the insurgency. In the past several months, their hands have been tied, in effect, by the United States military here and by the CPA because they didn't want them to take up arms. But they're out there. And everybody in this country is armed. So the question is: Will they begin to fight back against al-Zarqawi and the other insurgent groups that are plainly moving at will across Iraq?
MR. RUSSERT: But our American viewers should know, Tom, that the United States military, 138,000 strong, is still going to be involved in very perilous operations.
MR. BROKAW: You know, I really think, Tim, that that's the issue that a lot of people have not focused enough on. We're giving up political power here on Wednesday, but the United States military will be here for at least another year. And I wouldn't be at all surprised, having talked to senior military people here in the last 48 hours or so, that from this end, they'll ask the Pentagon now for additional troops in the next several months because their task really was trying to maintain security here, trying to build up the old Iraqi army and the police force, trying to protect themselves and fight what is turning
out to be a very tenacious insurgency. You have 138,000 troops. Many of them have been extended on their tours and they're going to have a tough time staying through the summer months as stretched out as thin as they are in some areas.
MR. RUSSERT: Tom, you spoke earlier today with Ahmad Chalabi who had been a favorite of the Bush administration on the payroll of the Pentagon for some $350,000 a month until just recently, and you talked to him about weapons of mass destruction. Let's listen to your interview:
MR. BROKAW: You believe that there were weapons of mass destruction here and more were being developed.
DR. AHMAD CHALABI (Iraqi National Congress): I do, yes.
MR. BROKAW: Where are they?
DR. CHALABI: Well, I think they are hidden.
MR. BROKAW: You think they're still here?
DR. CHALABI: They are still here and it's a very big concern for us. One of the shells showed up in a terrorist attack two months ago I believe. I think there are munitions of chemical and biological munitions around. And I believe that there are stockpiles which are done. You have to remember that those things are small in size.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Tom, do others share Dr. Chalabi's view about WMD?
MR. BROKAW: So far we've not been able to find anybody who shares that view, but Dr. Chalabi believes that quite strongly and he continues to be a player here. He remains a powerful Shiite with connections and, of course, he still has a strong organization reaching all the way from Mosul in the north down to the south. He also said today he's very grateful to the American people and to those young men and women who gave their lives for the liberation of Iraq. I pointed out to him, however, that that's not why they came to war here. They came to war here, they were told, to save the United States
from the threat of Iraq. And he then responded by saying, "But it would be outlandish of anyone to suggest that it was my idea that they came here to protect America. I always talked about weapons of mass destruction and the importance of liberating Iraq." He said, "If they came to protect America, that's the fault of the CIA."
He plainly is at war with George Tenet. And as you know, Tim, in Washington, there's a battle royal going on between the Chalabi admirers who blame Tenet for his fix and those who say, "We've had enough of this guy. We've been paying him a lot of money and we were misled at various levels by him."
MR. RUSSERT: Tom, finally, in your private conversations with U.S. leadership over there, do they believe that Iraq can, in fact, be stabilized and emerge into some form of democracy?
MR. BROKAW: You know, Tim, I'm reminded of an old military saying by one of my friends at the highest ranks of military that hope is not a policy, but that's their hope. Their hope is that once the Iraqi people see that they have Iraqi people in positions of control and authority, it will change, if you will, the DNA of the resistance here to cooperate in a new Iraqi government. But this is always a complex place, and part of the problem with that equation is that a lot of the people who have positions of authority now were put there by the U.N. or by the United States. A number of them were exiles during
the Saddam regime, and on the streets of Baghdad, from the ground up, they say, "Hey, look, we suffered under Saddam's regime for 25 to 35 years. We want to be running our own country." So everyone is very suspect here.
And Iraq is divided up into so many parts, Tim, all at war with each other, tribal feuds, sectarian feuds of one kind or another, geographic feuds. And the question is: Can they get together with no tradition of democracy for the last 40 years and find a way out of this deep and bloody swamp that they're now in?
MR. RUSSERT: Tom Brokaw, we thank you for that report. We'll watch you all week long on "NBC Nightly News," and be safe.
Now, let's turn and talk to our assembled panel about the challenges, first of all, confronting George W. Bush, trying to maintain support for the war in Iraq. This is how Richard Stevenson wrote the challenge in The New York Times this week: "Banned biological and chemical weapons: none yet found. Percentage of Iraqis who view American-led forces as liberators: 2, according to a poll commissioned last month by the Coalition Provisional Authority. Number of possible Al Qaeda associates known to have
been in Iraq in recent years: one, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whose links to the terrorist group and Mr. Hussein's government remain sketchy. That is the difficult reality Mr. Bush faces 15 months after ordering the invasion of Iraq."
Speaker Gingrich, you're in London. How does the president maintain support of the war in Iraq?
MR. NEWT GINGRICH: Well, I think first of all, when you realize that President Putin of Russia publicly said last week that he had personally warned President Bush on several occasions that the Iraqis were planning terrorist attacks against the United States, I think that it's important to put in context that description you just read. The president of the United States had from a variety of sources reasons to worry about Iraq and, frankly, if today we had a attack that had biological weapons involved and we traced it back to Iraq, everybody would be screaming for the president's head for not having, after 9/11, been aggressive.
The problem we have in Iraq is the same as the problem we have in Afghanistan, where yesterday the Taliban hijacked a bus and killed 16 out of 17 Afghans, apparently because they had a voting card. And I think the president has to say to the country the truth, which is this is going to be a long war. It's a war between civilization and barbarism. The people who slit the throats and cut off the heads of television with happiness would kill millions of Americans. There's an al-Qaeda Web site that says it will take at least four million American death for al-Qaeda to succeed. They mean it.
And I would say to the critics of the plan, and I personally have been critical of parts of it, I'm delighted we're turning power over to the Iraqis. We should have done so a year ago, as we did in Afghanistan. But what is the alternative? If we're not going to stick it out in Iraq, if we're not going to stick it out in Afghanistan, then what was the lesson of 9/11?
MR. RUSSERT: Senator McConnell, the problem that the president faces is 54 percent of the American people now have said they are against the war in Iraq. They don't think it was a good idea. Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz said this this week, that he had "underestimated the violent tenacity of an insurgency. `If you want to say what might have been underestimated, I think there was probably too great a willingness to believe that once we got the 55 people on the blacklist, the rest of those killers would stop fighting.'"
And George Casey, the general who'll be in charge of the multinational force told Congress this on Thursday.
(Videotape, June 24, 2004):
GENERAL GEORGE CASEY: I think the insurgency is much stronger than I certainly would have anticipated. I think they've got support from external sources.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: So if the American people say, "Mr. President, there are no weapons of mass destruction as promised. We are not greeted as liberators. The insurgency is much more ferocious." How long can the president go to the American people and ask them to stay the course?
SEN. MITCH McCONNELL, (R-KY): Well, you know, a more interesting poll really was the poll in The Washington Post Friday, an independent poll taken of Iraqi citizens, about how they feel about what's happening. Sixty-eight percent of the Iraqis feel that the new government is credible. Four out of five of them feel that things will be better in the future. The new prime minister has a 73 percent approval rating, something an American politician would die for. And if that's not good enough, the new president has an 84 percent approval rating.
My point is that people most directly affected by this at the moment are optimistic about their future, and the reason they are is because for 25 years they were slaughtered in large numbers by the government of that country. American public opinion ebbs and flows based upon our 24-hour news cycles. I think the challenge the president has in this election year is to step back and remind everybody of what has been accomplished since 9/11. Over 50 million people liberated, a new constitution in Afghanistan with elections coming in September, a new interim government, very popular in Iraq, with a new constitution to be drafted and elections to occur. And in Iraq all of this will occur within a thousand days, Tim. It took us 12 years in the United States to get from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution.
It is challenging in an election environment, when polls go up and down, to deal with this situation. But I think what the president needs to do is to remind everybody of how successful we've been to date. The final point I would make, no one would have predicted on September the 12th of 2001 that we wouldn't be attacked again here at home. And I think the fact that the president has gotten us on offense, has gone
after the terrorists where they are, is the principal reason that we've suffered no additional attacks, at least to this point, here in the United States.
MR. RUSSERT: There have been a lot of second-guessing of the war by Democrats, Madam Secretary. But this is the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998. And here's the language: "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq..." Passed by Congress, signed by President Clinton. And here's President Clinton in December 16 of 1998.
(Videotape, February 17, 1998):
PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost his will--its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And someday, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: That was the president in February of '98. That's exactly the challenge that George Bush seemed to encounter. Wouldn't President Clinton have also tried to eliminate Saddam Hussein the way President Bush did?
MS. MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well, we did call for regime change, but in a completely different way. There was no idea of a ground invasion. And if you remember, Tim, there was very heavy bombing in the no-fly zones and the sanctions in place and pressure internationally to get Saddam Hussein to comply. I think that President Bush won a great victory in the United Nations when he got the
inspectors back in. The thing that went wrong is that he did not allow those inspectors to do his job. And part of what's going on here is the administration is believing itself. So all this happy talk about what is happening in Iraq, I think, does not really reflect the reality of what Tom Brokaw has been talking about it, and what we've all seen, which is that--to use a diplomatic term of art--it's a mess. There is a completely chaotic situation there, and I think that everybody wants there to be success. I think that has to be absolutely clear. All Americans, Democrats and Republicans, want to see a success in Iraq. And what we have to do is to deal with the reality and not with what we would like to see happening. And on the 30th, from as far as I can see, we are going to be turning something over to somebody, but every day that we get news, it's a little unclear.
And I hope, Senator McConnell, that the prime minister of Iraq doesn't have to die for his high ratings, because there have been threats against him already. And he has a very, very difficult job ahead. And I think we should all try to be supportive of the new Iraqi government, and understand the fact that our troops are going to have to stay there, and that we do not as yet have enough international support to do the huge job that will come about of supporting Iraq.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you think there's a possibility we could in effect "lose Iraq" and it could become a haven for terrorism the way Afghanistan did?
MS. ALBRIGHT: Well, I sure hope not, because it would be even worse than what's happening in Afghanistan, given the location in the Middle East and the possibility of the spread of various terrorist networks out of Iraq and using that as a base. So I never did believe that there was a connection between al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein and 9/11. But I now do think that Iraq has become a magnet and a gathering ground for terrorists. And the idea, and you raised this, that Iraqis are now going to have to sort out who's who among the Iraqis. And Prime Minister Allawi in an op-ed today talks about how he wants to provide some amnesty for the good Iraqis vs. the bad ones, and it's a very, very hard job ahead for all of us.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Podesta, you were Bill Clinton's chief of staff. Madame Secretary Albright described this as a mess. But isn't it a bipartisan mess? Congress voted overwhelmingly to support the president.
This was Hillary Clinton, the senator from New York, the former first lady, back in October of 2002: "It's clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological, chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all
too well, affects American security. This much is undisputed." And she voted for, in effect, the war.
John Kerry, the Democratic candidate for president, stood on the floor of the Senate October 9, 2002, and said this.
(Videotape, October 9, 2002):
SENATOR JOHN KERRY, (D-MA): Mr. President, when I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein, because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: John Kerry, Hillary Clinton both supported the war.
MR. JOHN PODESTA: Look, I think Democrats and Republicans wanted the president to have the authority to confront Saddam Hussein. They thought he was a dangerous character operating there. But I think that the question is: How was this matter prosecuted? They politicized the intelligence. They didn't listen to the people who had the greatest expertise, like Rick Shinseki, who said we needed a bigger force going in and to deal with the aftermath of Iraq. I think the reconstruction effort has been one of letting big contracts to U.S. contractors rather than trying to put people back to work. I think one of the most important and wrong decisions of the war was the decision to essentially send the entire Iraqi army home with their guns and disband it without any plan for reconstitution.
We now have an army in Iraq where 2,800 people have been trained, as against a goal of 40,000. We have 75,000 Iraqi police on the payroll, but only 2,800 of whom have been fully trained, according to the CPA reports. And, you know, when they get into a confrontation, they put their guns down, they go home. So that's where we are.
Do people--do Americans across the political spectrum want this to be a success? I think the answer is: Of course. I think that, as the secretary mentioned, if this descends into chaos, it's bad for the people of Iraq, it's bad for the region, it's bad for the country and it's bad for the world. But the question is: How did we get there and what do we do now?
MR. RUSSERT: When you say the intelligence was politicized, former President Clinton, as you heard, said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Hillary Clinton: weapons of mass destruction. John Kerry: weapons of mass destruction. Were they duped?
MR. PODESTA: I think that the--I think what ended up happening, what continues to this day, is evidence was cherry-picked, it was pushed up, it was--they were--the case was made to the American people that we had to go in right now. Don't let the weapons inspectors do their job, get in there and build the kind of international support that we needed. So the multilateral coalition that we could have had, I think, had the weapons inspectors been able to finish their job, wasn't there. But, as I said, we are where we are today.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator McConnell, that's a strong charge: politicized intelligence, cherry-picked.
SEN. McCONNELL: Look, even the French, the Russians and the Germans and Secretary Albright believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Everybody believed it. That was the one thing everybody seemed to agree on before the war.
MR. RUSSERT: What happened?
SEN. McCONNELL: Well, they haven't been found yet. But, I mean, the point is, if the president was wrong about weapons of mass destruction, everybody else was wrong about it, because everybody felt that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. And, of course, we knew that he had used them in the past against his own people and against the Iranians, so it was reasonable to make this assumption. And the intelligence agencies of all of these countries must have been wrong as well.
MR. RUSSERT: I want to show you an interview Andrea Mitchell did with someone called "Anonymous." He's a 22-year veteran of the CIA. He's written a book called "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terrorism." This was on Wednesday. Let's listen.
(Videotape, Wednesday):
"ANONYMOUS" CIA ANALYST: Bin Laden, I think, and al-Qaeda and other of America's enemies in the Islamic world certainly saw the invasion of Iraq as, if you would, a Christmas gift they always wanted and never expected to get. It validated what they all said about American aggressiveness against Islam. It made us the occupiers of the second holiest place for Muslims in the world.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Speaker Gingrich, that's a much larger view by a 22-year veteran of the CIA who believes that we, in effect, have given Osama bin Laden a gift by radicalizing a part of the world in even a more extreme form prior than it had been to the invasion of Iraq.
MR. GINGRICH: Well, let me say first of all that that view, if you read his book, is much more complicated than just that quote. He basically suggests that unless we're willing to give up the oil fields, we're willing to abandon Israel, we're willing to abandon every major government in the Arab world that we are in a total war with bin Laden, that we have to either win or die. If you read the whole book, he says this is harder--and I think this is the key point that you were driving at a minute ago, Tim. This is a mess, but somebody has to stand up and say, "You know, this a real war." This is not just some
game on television where the good guys get to go in and clean out the bad guys and it's all done in 30 minutes and we all go home and have a beer.
This is a real war with real enemies who genuinely want to kill us. They want to kill us in Saudi Arabia where they're working. They want to kill us in Turkey. They want to kill us in Pakistan. They want to kill us in Afghanistan. They want to kill us in Iraq. And as they proved on 9/11, if they can find a way to get here, they're going to try to kill us in the United States.
Now, in a real war from 1861 to '64, it was a mess. From 1939 to 1944, it was a mess. The other side gets to be on offense, too. And I think if the president has any specific need right now, it is to look the American people in the face and say, "Every time you watch somebody having their head sawn off on television, remember that the lesson of 9/11 is we have to stick this out and win."
And I would say back to friends on the other side: Would we really be safer today if Saddam was still in power? Would we really have a better world if Saddam were still in power? I don't think so. And that doesn't mean I agree with everything we've done in the last year, but it is in general in the right direction. And we had better hope that both in Afghanistan, in Pakistan and in Saudi Arabia and Iraq that the forces of civilization defeat the forces of barbarism.
MR. RUSSERT: I want to show you a graphic from the book that the speaker's referring to Anonymous "Imperial Hubris" where he talks about this worldwide Islamic insurgency and here's the graphic. "US leaders refused to accept the obvious. We are fighting a worldwide Islamic insurgency--not criminality or terrorism--and our policy and procedures have failed to make more than a modest dent in enemy forces. ... In the period since 11 September, the United States has dealt lethal blows to Al Qaeda's
leadership and--if official claims are true--have captured 3,000 Al Qaeda foot soldiers. At the same time, we have waged two failed half-wars and, in doing so, left Afghanistan and Iraq seething with anti-U.S. sentiment, fertile grounds for the expansion of Al Qaeda and kindred groups."
Secretary Albright, should it be recognized as a war in effect, as he says, "an Islamic insurgency that must be put down"?
MS. ALBRIGHT: I don't think I would see it that way. I think we clearly do not understand Islam completely and we have to figure out distinctions between those who also are victims of extremism and Islamic fundamentalism, jihadism. And what needs to happen here is that we have to try to get some of the Islamic countries to help us in this, which requires not only help within Iraq but also in other parts of the world. We cannot see this as a war of civilizations or civilization. It is being attacked clearly by barbaric aspects, but I don't think that we can see this fully in that way of just totally anti-Islam. I think we do not understand everything that's going on, and the thing that bothers me is it is clear that we have been capturing al-Qaeda terrorists but we do not know how many more are being created as a result of the activities.
And I'm very glad to see Saddam Hussein gone. That is good. But I'm not sure we're safer today than we were before. I think there are many aspects--homeland security has been working, but there's still a lot of holes in that. And I would say that the situation emanating from Iraq is more dangerous in terms of the number of terrorists that are out there and Afghanistan is half-finished job. We diverted our attention from Afghanistan to do a war of choice, not of necessity, in Iraq. The thing is now it is a necessity and not a choice to get it right in Iraq.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator McConnell, are we safer now?
SEN. McCONNELL: Absolutely. Let's take a look at the new government in Iraq. We're talking about the old government with Saddam Hussein. The new government out of 33 ministers, six are women, 17 are PhDs. The Iraqi ambassador of the United States, a woman, was in my office the other day. She is extremely optimistic about the future of her country. How in the world could anybody argue that we're not better off now than we were around 9/11 and right after that?
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Podesta, this is a political year, as we well know, as Senator McConnell mentioned the discussion is taking part in a political environment. How would John Kerry be any different than George Bush in dealing with Iraq right now, not a year ago but right now?
MR. PODESTA: Well, I think that Senator Kerry laid that out over the last couple of weeks, which is to say that he would stay there. I think he would try to finish this job. I think he would try to move the Iraqis into a position where they are having real elections and sovereignty is taking place. But I think that, you know, to say right now vs. a year ago is to miss something important, which is that John Kerry has, I think, a very different strategy, a very different outlook about the world, about the role of the United
States, about trying to strengthen our alliances around the world in attacking this very real problem, which the excerpt from the book you put up on the board indicates, which is how are we going to manage a problem that spans across many nations where this terrorist threat is rising again, to put it down? Do you do it by unilateral approach? Do you do it by ignore your alliances and your allies, or do you do it by trying to take the advantage, which quite frankly we had in the wake of 9/11, where people were
sympathetic to the United States and try to build a coalition including moderate Muslim, countries against the forces of chaos.
MR. RUSSERT: But would John Kerry do anything differently than George Bush right now, because that's the choice the American people have?
MR. PODESTA: Well, I think that you know, right now the president seems to be coming to John Kerry's position rather than Senator Kerry trying to define a new position. You saw Speaker Gingrich several months ago attacking people in the State Department. Now, we're embracing the people in the State Department. We've gone to the U.N. and gotten a Security Council resolution. The president is at the NATO summit trying to do something that John Kerry suggested four or five months ago which is to get NATO in trying to do the things that NATO can do, which is including training of the police and training of the security forces. So I think that the president is actually moving towards the Kerry position on this. But, you know, I think it's a difficult situation. We need to kind of manage it as we go forward.
MR. RUSSERT: Speaker Gingrich, I'll give you the last word, but does Mr. Podesta have a point? If you look at the Bush position, it is now embracing the international community much more actively. We had a representative from the United Nations in charge of negotiations who said some very blatant anti-Israeli things. We have embraced former members of the Saddam Hussein military and Ba'ath regime. We're negotiating with radical Islamics on the ground. Hasn't the Bush administration's position changed on Iraq?
MR. GINGRICH: I think it's evolved, and I think it should have evolved. I think things that they thought would work a year ago didn't work, and I think they would have been pretty stupid not to evolve. But let me go back to the core of this decision. Ninety-five percent of the Muslim world is with us in the broadest sense. They do not in the end want to live in dictatorships. They don't want to live in a world where women have no rights and are totally repressed. They don't want to have religious extremists
dominating them. But 5 percent willing to use bombs, willing to use knives and willing to use rifles can dominate the 95.
The question for the American people is are we prepared to stand with the moderate and traditional Muslims and defeat this worldwide insurgency? And if so, how can we do it best? I think while we're evolving these policies, you have to give President Bush a lot of credit for having had a lot of courage when everybody else had talked for a long time and nobody had done anything. In Afghanistan and in Iraq, he's acted, and I think in the long run, we're safer because of it.
MR. RUSSERT: I'll give you the last word, Madam Secretary. So we give George Bush a lot of credit, as Speaker Gingrich said?
MS. ALBRIGHT: Well, I think he has been resolute. But the bottom line is did we need the Iraq War at this time when we have not finished the war in Afghanistan, which I think was a legitimate response to what happened on 9/11, and I think there is a real question as to whether America is safer today than before. It's great that Saddam Hussein is gone, but we are seeing our forces under threat and people being beheaded. So I think there is a genuine question about the direction this is taking. And I wish the interim government of Iraq the very best, and we need to support it in every way we can because they are the hope and the future here.
MR. RUSSERT: To continued. Madeleine Albright, Newt Gingrich, Mitch McConnell, John Podesta, thank you all.
Coming next, our political roundtable. The Bill Clinton book, Gwen Ifill and Ron Brownstein will focus on it as well as "Fahrenheit 9/11" and Mr. Anonymous of the CIA. What effect will they have on the Bush-Kerry race 128 days ago. All coming up right here on MEET THE PRESS.
MR. RUSSERT: How do Ron Brownstein and Gwen Ifill see the issues affecting Campaign 2004 after this station break.
MR. RUSSERT: And we are back. Ron Brownstein, Gwen Ifill, welcome. 2004, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. Everyone seems to acknowledge that that is going to be the central issue in this presidential race. I want to go back one more time to Andrea Mitchell's interview with Anonymous, the 22-year veteran from the CIA. Let's watch.
(Videotape, June 23, 2004):
"ANONYMOUS" CIA ANALYST: I think someone should have gone to the president when the discussion of going to Iraq was broached and have said, "Mr. President, this is something that can only help Osama bin Laden. Whatever the danger posed by Saddam, whatever weapons he had is almost irrelevant, in that the boost it would give to al-Qaeda was easily seen." And if that message wasn't delivered, then I think there was a mistake made.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Ron Brownstein, it seems to being framed as a war of choice, as a war of necessity. But can John Kerry effectively make that case having voted for the war?
MR. RON BROWNSTEIN: Well, I think Kerry has had trouble increasingly, as John Podesta suggested, as President Bush has moved to change some of his positions, rely more on the international community, it's been harder for John Kerry to establish a clear line of demarcation and distinction with the president's policies. But the quotes from Anonymous, in my experience talking to voters, really go right to the heart of this election. I really feel that as I've been out looking at the polls and also talking to people, I agree with you, Tim, Iraq overshadows everything else that the president has done in the minds of the voters. And it really comes down to this core question: Did we have to do it? Is it making us safer?
Our last L.A. Times poll, almost 85 percent of the people who said the war was worth it, said they were voting for Bush; almost 85 percent of the people who said it was not worth it were voting for John Kerry. It's a fundamental dividing line in the electorate. It may be that John Kerry doesn't--what he says is not that important one way or the other. But people really are reacting to the decision the president made and how they feel about it.
MR. RUSSERT: Dominant issue?
MS. GWEN IFILL: Of course it's a dominant issue. But I'm struck, even with the anonymous book and with all the other conversations which we just had here today, how much we're talking about the past, how much we're still having this debate about whether we should have gone, what we should have done, instead of this turning point. What the Bush administration obviously wants to do--I talked to Condoleezza Rice this week, and one of the things--you can hear their line where they're talking about what's happening in the future. They're spinning everything forward, past this turning point on Wednesday with the hand-over, when at the very least they're hoping people won't be asking them the
questions when things go wrong. That's the very least they can hope.
But the fact that we keep--that there have been so many--there's been so much bad news, that the insurgency has risen, that the weapons were never found, and that we're still raising these questions, and yet President Bush is still neck and neck with John Kerry, tells you that, even though Iraq is a determining factor, it's not yet--it's not putting the president out of the race at all.
MR. RUSSERT: There's a new movie, as we all well know, "Fahrenheit 9/11" by Michael Moore, which is playing to packed houses. Gwen, you've seen the movie. What's your sense?
MS. IFILL: You know, I look at this movie as a journalist, and as a journalist I have this affection for facts and accuracy. And even though there are facts in this movie, on whole it's not accurate. Michael Moore is guilty of the same thing that he and a lot of Democrats say that the Republicans are guilty of, especially on the Iraq-9/11 connection, and that's--I call it guilt by juxtaposition. You put several facts out there then and say to the viewer, "How could this not be true?"
The president, according to Democrats, did that with 9/11. He said, "Well, there was terrorism on 9/11. There's terrorism in Afghanistan. And we know that Saddam Hussein consorted with terrorists, and you make the conclusion." Michael Moore is doing the same thing. He's saying, "Well, look at the president and the Saudis. They were all friendly." You see a lot of pictures of him shaking hands with people wearing turbans. You raise mysterious questions about that, never completely answer them, and then
leave with a lot of, I think, fairly cheap shots at this administration, which makes it a movie, but it doesn't make it fact.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: I have a more complicated view of it, I think. I don't think you go to Michael Moore for fair and balanced any more than you go to the other people who use that slogan for fair and balanced. As--it's over the top in many respects. The allegations about the Saudi flights, Dick Clark and the 9-11 Commission, for example, who have not been apologists for President Bush, reached very different conclusions. But I think the movie is much more successful in telling human stories than political stories. And the second half of the movie, when he focuses on the impact, the cost of the war in Iraq, both in Iraq and in the U.S., although there are quibbles--you can have quarrels with him on that front as well--the theater that I was in, you could really hear a pin drop for the second half of the movie. I could barely hear people breathing. And I think it really is no crime to remind people every so often that war is hell. And that's what this movie does very effectively when it focuses on the human story rather than the political story, which I agree is a bit overwrought at times.
MR. RUSSERT: A conservative group has filed an action with the Federal Election Commission saying the ads for the movie are, in effect, political ads against George Bush and should not be allowed. A well-known producer said to me yesterday, "Maybe this is the wave of the future."
MR. BROWNSTEIN: Yeah.
MR. RUSSERT: Michael Moore will make a movie, conservatives will make a movie, and they'll be able to put forward a--push a political viewpoint in the theater houses.
MS. IFILL: And guess what? Moviegoers are smart enough to decide what it is they believe. The thing about the fair and balanced thing--I mean, the truth--people really can decide if you give them the facts. And the interesting thing about this book--and you're right, pin drop, very effective story about a woman who lost her son is part of this movie. But you know what? The truth is, people who made up their minds and don't like President Bush are going to come away still not liking President Bush. People who
made up their minds and like President Bush think this movie is terrible--I mean, lawsuits aside. And people in the middle, I don't know if this is going to change any minds.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: Yeah. Yeah. It feels like the debate between the parties is getting so intense that it's spilling over the banks that we've cut out for it.
MS. IFILL: Yeah.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: I mean, traditionally they've been arguing, first in print and daily and weekly newspapers, cable TV and talk radio, Sunday shows like this--now look at the best-seller list. Both sides, really, starting under Clinton--Republican and conservatives systematically reaching an audience with anti-Clinton books. We've seen in the late '90s people thought it was only conservatives' books, but there's obviously an audience for liberal books...
MS. IFILL: Right.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: ...as well; now the movies. There will be a documentary about John Kerry, as well, in addition to this. So there is clearly sort of a broadening of this argument out into pop culture. And the striking thing, I think--Gwen is right--is that, you know, if you look at how divided this electorate is--and that's one reason why John Kerry and George Bush are so close together--the last 5 or 6 or 7 percent, the ones who will probably decide this, are the ones who are probably least likely to be affected by any of this. But nonetheless, I think it's reflective, like the enormous amounts of money the candidates have raised, there's a lot of passion out there, Tim, and there's a big audience for political argument at this point in our history.
MR. RUSSERT: My sense is we'll stop using the term documentary because Michael Moore, in his own words, is a provocateur, a propagandist, a pamphleteer, whatever. They exist on the left and they exist on the right.
MS. IFILL: Well, as David Brooks pointed out in The New York Times yesterday, in Europe, Michael Moore goes about very widely bashing America and bashing Americans as being stupid and not knowing how to put one foot in front of the other and he's received like a conquering hero. They love this. They want to hear this. Now, that's fine. They think he's a documentarian. They think he is bringing them facts. Now, they don't vote in American elections, but there is a wider question to be raised about the impact of Americans who take that abroad in a time of war.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: And the Bush campaign wants to make the Kerry campaign answer for some of these charges. I mean, they've begun to talk about a coalition of the wild-eyed, trying to identify and link John Kerry to some of the more extreme critiques from elements of the Democratic Party and it can be a problem as it was for Wes Clark during the primaries when we were in New Hampshire talking about this when Michael Moore accused President Bush of desertion. So, you know, this is a powerful statement. It's going to reach a portion of the public, but it may also cause problems with others.
MR. RUSSERT: Here's someone else who's barnstorming across the country: William Jefferson Clinton. There he is on his book tour signing books, greeting people. He was interviewed by Katie Couric the other day on the "Today" show and this is what the former president had to say.
(Videotape, June 23, 2004):
MR. CLINTON: After 1968, they thought there would never be another Democratic president. They thought the only reason Jimmy Carter was elected was because of Watergate. And they really believed when I won, it erupted the national order of things, but I don't quarrel with that and I don't think that Starr believes he's a bad man. I think he believes he's a good, God-fearing Christian man who was driving an infidel from the temple. But his goal was to drive me from office whether I committed a crime or not. The American people need to do that.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: "Interrupted national order," "drive me from office." That's the way President Clinton is using this book to frame history by saying he withstood an attempted coup against his Democratic administration.
MS. IFILL: You know, we spend a lot of time talking these days about how divided the country is. And I think we can probably fairly trace it back to the Clinton years, not that it's Bill Clinton's fault, but you can definitely say that this kind of split developed and deepened at that time when people began to dig their heels in and not listen to the other point of view. And to that degree, Bill Clinton is right. But it's been fascinating to watch him re-define it. Instead of saying, "This was all a terrible thing and I'm ashamed of it," saying, "No, it's a badge of honor. And I was the person who was going to face it down." Now, I don't know if that actually helps or hurts John Kerry, but it makes it a very interesting year with Bill Clinton kind of out there stirring the pot that way.
MR. RUSSERT: What does it do with the Kerry race? Does it suffocate the Kerry message? Does it remind people of Bill Clinton which is a plus with Democrats and a negative...
MR. BROWNSTEIN: Yeah, well...
MR. RUSSERT: ...with Independents or Republicans? What...
MR. BROWNSTEIN: ...let's pause it that in the end, given what we've been talking about for the first 45 minutes of this show, this election is going to be about John Kerry and George Bush and in particular the strategy on defending the country in the age of global terror.
So all of this is going to be at the margin like the Ronald Reagan funeral, but I've got to think that the John Kerry campaign and Democrats in general would rather have Bill Clinton out there talking about 23 million jobs, deficit to surplus, largest reduction of poverty since the 1960s and not trying to refight the question of whether he was properly impeached and work out his own sort of personal demons, which he talks about what led to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I mean, Clinton is clear--people wondered about whether John Kerry and Bill Clinton were sort of coordinating on this. The answer has to be no because this would not be the message that Democrats want to hear. This is not the part of the Clinton presidency they really wanted to see relived in the middle of a presidential campaign.
MR. RUSSERT: We're going to take a quick break and come back and talk about Bush vs. Kerry 128 days ago. Why is it so close? I'll have more from Ron Brownstein and Gwen Ifill after this.
MR. RUSSERT: And we are back. Ron Fournier, a great political reporter for the Associated Press, wrote it this way: "Bush Afloat Despite Bad News. From his unremarkable State of the Union address to the 360th slain U.S. soldier in Iraq,
this has been a disastrous year for President Bush, and yet he's tied with John Kerry in his race for re-election. How can that be? Democrats say it's only a matter of time before events take their toll on Bush. His job approval rating is at a dangerously low level for an incumbent, and a majority of Americans believe their country is on the wrong track. Republicans say it's a sign of weakness that Kerry hasn't pulled ahead during Bush's slump. The Massachusetts senator's personal approval ratings are almost as low as the president's thanks to an $80 million Bush campaign commercials that labeled Kerry a flip-flopping, tax-raising, soft-on-terrorism liberal. Independent analysts say at least 80 percent of voters are partisan--they picked sides long ago--are evenly split between Bush and Kerry. That leaves a precious few swing voters waiting to tip the balance. While they are increasingly disenchanted with Bush's performance, swing voters seem in no rush to judgment."
MS. IFILL: Well, only we want to figure this out in June, you know? Everybody else is willing to wait and see what happens at the conventions. And everybody else is also going to be driven more by things like--I saw Billy Crystal the other day at a fund-raiser for John Kerry, big John Kerry supporter says to him "If you're having a good time, make sure you tell your face." I mean, it's going to be--the fact that you can flip that. Why isn't John Kerry doing better if Bush is doing so well? Not why is Bush doing so poorly? And if you look at it that way, you realize folks are going to wait until after they've seen conventions, after they've seen running mates. And the thing we as reporters hate the most, the great unknowns, which is what's going to happen on the ground in Iraq, which is going to make this all change by August.
MR. RUSSERT: And three presidential debates.
MS. IFILL: Absolutely.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: John Kerry has not lit the world on fire. He really, you know, is still, I think, struggling to find his message. He's in the off-Broadway period. He has time till the convention. Historically, Tim, it's hard for the challenger before the convention to really drive a systematic, coherent impression on the American public. The bottom line, as Ron Fournier's article suggests, though, is President Bush's approval rating and the sense of the right, whether the country is on the right track. If those numbers don't improve, and they will have to improve from events on the ground, primarily in Iraq, if they don't improve by the fall, President Bush will be facing an uphill challenge regardless, I think, of how people feel about John Kerry because my sense, history and just talking to voters this year is, President Bush is dominating this election pro or con, and if he cannot improve the verdict on him a little bit, it's going to be tough.
MR. RUSSERT: Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, incumbents, all won big. Carter, former President Bush, lost big. And people seem to make a decision at the end, whether keep 'em or get rid of 'em.
MS. IFILL: I know. What are we going to do all summer, Tim?
MR. RUSSERT: That has to the last word, Gwen Ifill. Why did you have to say that?
MS. IFILL: Depressing, I know.
MR. BROWNSTEIN: There's a Senate race, too.
MR. RUSSERT: We'll be right back.
MR. RUSSERT: Start your day tomorrow on "Today" with Katie and Matt. Then the "NBC Nightly News" with Tom Brokaw. That's all for today. We'll be back next week at a special early time, 8 a.m. Eastern, right before the Wimbledon tennis finals.
If it's Sunday, it's MEET THE PRESS.


text:
SEATTLE -- Washington state is doing a good job collecting information about students and how they are doing in school, but officials need to do better in using the data to improve learning, according to a report released Thursday.
In their annual assessment of how states are doing at collecting, analyzing and distributing student data, the national Data Quality Campaign rated Washington near the middle of the pack.
The Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan advocacy organization noted that Washington was one of only a few states that connected teacher effectiveness with the colleges where they were trained, and that it may be the only state that sends that information to colleges in other states when teachers get their degrees elsewhere.
But it said it wants to see the systems for student data improved in Washington and in many other states.
The state is looking into ways to make the data more accessible, said Nathan Olson, spokesman for the state Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. He noted that Washington's goal was similar to the Data Quality Campaign's: "To have an effective data system that can be a tool in helping all students achieve."
"The most recent analysis of the Data Quality Campaign shows that while we have made progress on effective data use, we have more work to do," Olson said. "We are doing much of that work."
That work will include Washington's goal to expand its system from preschool and into college, he said.
The data report on Washington was based on information provided by Gov. Chris Gregoire's office, through the Office of Financial Management. State officials consider it a fair assessment.
During a news conference, Aimee Rogstad Guidera, executive director of the Data Quality Campaign, shared her vision of teachers opening up their laptop computers at the beginning of the school year to look at detailed information about each incoming student. She said she wanted to know why student information is not as easily accessible as information for restaurants.
In only a handful of states, teachers can learn whether a particular student struggled with reading last year or had a habit of being tardy to school and start out the year with a plan for addressing those concerns, she said.
Guidera said that kind of information is available in most states, but few places get it or get help to understand how to use it in the classroom.
"State policymakers must actively support a culture in which all education stakeholders are actually using and learning from this crucial information to improve student achievement -- not just using data for shame and blame," she said.
According to the information sent to the group from state governors and education departments, only six states -- Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina and Tennessee -- make sure educators can access and use data in ways similar to her example.
The group found that only eight states, plus the District of Columbia, can ensure parents have access to key information about their children -- Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Texas, Utah and the District of Columbia.
Data Quality Campaign works with a broad coalition of government organizations and nonprofits and advocates for good data to replace anecdotal evidence concerning public schools. Groups like the National Governors Association, the American Federation of Teachers and many other national education groups support the list of 10 data goals on which the Data Quality Campaign rates the states.
Those goals include setting up an "early warning system" so parents and students know if they are in danger of not graduating from high school. Another is to improve the ability of teachers, parents and others to use the data the state is collecting.
-- The Associated Press
SEATTLE -- Washington state is doing a good job collecting information about students and how they are doing in school, but officials need to do better in using the data to improve learning, according to a report released Thursday.
Note to readers: if you purchase something through one of our affiliate links we may earn a commission.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
8 tips to break free from your smartphone
Constantly tethered to your smartphone? Experts are waving the red flag. While addition to your favorite portable gadget can be both hard to define and oddly socially acceptable, too much attention to tech can leave you drained and unable to concentrate. Here are eight ways to get your life back, now.
"Too much information can overwhelm our senses and leave us feeling depleted," says Courtney Stewart, research associate at the Indiana Prevention Resource Center in the U.S.
"Students and others could experience the inability to concentrate on the task at hand, be it school work, your job or an important conversation," she said. "School work may suffer, deadlines are not met, and many instructors and employers now ban the use of cell phones while in class or on the job." Even worse, walking or driving while distracted by your mobile phone can have even more serious consequences.
"So put the phone down and spend some time talking with your friends face to face or better yet, take a walk with your friends if you want to connect and get some mood-boosting exercis," she said.
But are we really addicted? A 2012 study from Baylor University in the UK found that mobile phone addiction is driven by the same impulses as credit card overspending and compulsive buying. Prior research has found that young adults send an average of nearly 110 text messages a day and check their email 60 times a day on average.
A separate 2011 study conducted by the University of Maryland's International Center for Media & the Public Agenda recorded reactions when it asked university students around the world to abstain from media for 24 hours, with students reporting cravings, anxiety and depression during the media fast.
If you think you may be tech obsessed, Stewart offers eight tips to breaking free from the chains.
1. Turn your phone off (not just silenced) while in the movie theater, or leave your phone in the car when spending time with friends.
2. Dine without your phone nearby, and never leave it directly on the table.
3. Turn your phone off while doing homework or in a meeting.
4. Resist the urge to tweet or update a Facebook status while at work.
5. Go on a walk, whether it is with a partner, child or pet, and leave the phone at home.
6. Trade in a mobile game for a game with others in person.
7. Look up directions before getting in the car to avoid looking at a GPS while driving.
8. Never text while driving.


text:
Rick Atkinson closes his war trilogy with 'The Guns at Last Light'
After calling it a masterpiece of deep reporting and powerful storytelling, what more needs to be said of Rick Atkinson's trilogy about World War II?
The first volume, "An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942-1943" received the Pulitzer Prize for history. The second, "The Day of Battle: The War in Sicily and Italy, 1943-1944," concerned a middle section of the war often overlooked by historians.
Now comes the finale, "The Guns at Last Light: The War in Western Europe, 1944-1945."
The challenge of the third volume would seem to have differed from that of the first two, which dealt largely with events that, while complex and consequential, are not the continuing focus of movies and documentaries.
The story of the Allied drive from D-Day to Berlin is far better known to the public. Finding new material and presenting a fresh take on well-trod material, like the uneasy relationship between coalition partners, might have been daunting in lesser hands.
But Atkinson, a former reporter and senior editor at the Washington Post, is more than equal to the task. "The Guns at Last Light" continues and deepens themes and character studies seen in the first two volumes.
Atkinson's admiration for the American force, from its leadership to its lowest-ranking infantry soldier, is rightfully enormous. The morality of the Allied cause is never in doubt. But he is not captive to the "good war" or "greatest generation" idolatry.
The Americans, even Dwight Eisenhower, made battlefield mistakes, costing lives. There were screw-ups, logistics problems, petty jealousies and blind spots. The harsh European winter seemed to catch the Americans by surprise, several years running, Atkinson writes.
The American generals were feuding among themselves, the British generals were feuding with the Americans, and everyone was feuding with the French leader Charles De Gaulle and his self-aggrandizing habit of referring to himself in the third person.
Eisenhower wrote to Gen. George Marshall that next to the bad weather, the French "have caused me more trouble in this war than any other single factor. They even rank above landing craft."
But Eisenhower knew that the art of command "at times requires tactical retreat for strategic advantage, in a headquarters no less than on a battlefield, and by midday on Wednesday the supreme commander sensibly recognized that in the interest of Allied comity he would have to yield" to De Gaulle's latest demand, Atkinson writes.
As befits a journalist who knows his material inside and out, Atkinson can provide the incisive explanation to a complex situation or personage.
Of the British general Bernard Montgomery, he writes, "Knowing and unknowing, he could offend, rankle, enrage. Hardly a fatal flaw for a subaltern brawling in the trenches, this defect proved near mortal in coalition warfare, when political nuance and national sensitivities could be as combustible as gunpowder."
Much of the trilogy — which took Atkinson 14 years to produce — can be read on two tracks: dealing with the specific circumstances of World War II and also making a generic comment about the brutality of modern warfare.
Of civilian casualties, he writes, "All told, three thousand Normans would be killed on June 6 and 7 (1944) by bombs, naval shells, and other insults to mortality; they joined fifteen thousand French civilians already dead from months of bombardment before the invasion."
And of a condition now called post-traumatic stress disorder, "…by mid-July (1944), such neuropsychiatric cases would account for one of every four infantry casualties in 21st Army Group, with the worst of them 'crouched down like hunted animals' in battalion aid stations."
There were also more than 500 cases of "S.I.W. — self-inflicted wounds, typically a gunshot to the heel, toe or finger."
If Atkinson dealt with only the major figures, Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley (he's no fan), Montgomery, Rommel, Marshall, et al., the trilogy would still be monumental. But all three books are full of lesser-known battlefield leaders such as Lt. Gen. Jacob Loucks Devers, a maverick who understood tank warfare in the late 1930s while other officers were pining for the return of the cavalry.
Devers' scratchy, egotistical personality alienated Eisenhower ("Ike hates him," Patton wrote in his diary) but the supreme commander understood that Devers had what it takes to be the modern warrior: bravery and brains, for sure, but also the ability to navigate political shoals.
Near the end of "Last Light," almost as a coda to his trilogy, Atkinson writes about the 60% of American fatalities whose remains, at the request of their families, were brought back to the U.S. at a cost to the government of $564.50 per body, "an unprecedented repatriation that only an affluent, victorious nation could afford."
Henry Wright, a Missouri farmer and widower, awaited the bodies of his three sons: one killed at the Bulge, one who died in a German prison camp, one who died just two weeks before the war ended. In a quiet, understated manner, Atkinson sets the scene:
"Gray and stooped, the elder Wright watched as the caskets were carried into the rustic bedroom where each boy had been born. Neighbors kept vigil overnight, carpeting the floor with roses, and in the morning they bore the brothers to Hilltop Cemetery for burial side by side beneath an iron sky.
"Thus did the fallen return from Europe, 82,357 of them."
The Guns at Last Light
The War in Western Europe, 1944-1945
Rick Atkinson
Henry Holt & Co.: 877 pp., $40
Love a good book?
Get the latest news, events and more from the Los Angeles Times Book Club, and help us get L.A. reading and talking.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.


text:
Toyota Hilux MK10 / Revo (2018-ON) Werk Commercial Hardtop Double Cab
Product Information
This product fits: Toyota Hilux MK10 / Revo (18-ON)
Part Number: TRDVS040
The WERK Commercial is our latest in Fleet inspired canopies. The Cab-Hi design maximises fuel economy whilst the commercially finished vertical rear door allows the maximum interior storage area. These practical canopies are painted in Pure White 040 and is still equipped with all your essentials:
Standard features to the WERK Commercial Canopy / Hardtop:
- Secured with 6 NON DRILL clamps.
- Integrated LED third brake light.
- Hand-laid fiberglass one piece shell for added strength
- Tempered safety privacy glass rear door ("E" Marked)
- Front window.
- Carpet headlining
- Battery powered LED interior light.
- Double locking catches with single door handle.
- Twin gas struts for easy opening and access.
- The WERK Commercial comes with a One Year Warranty...the best in the business!
Click to see
Click to see
Click to see
Click to see


text:
Was thinking about taking a holiday to alvor this July.
Could anyone tell me what the conditions are like over there , is the wind consistant and what size kites to bring??? and is there much family stuff to do as only two of the four going can kite thanks a lot.


text:
Apartment Burguburu - ANG1247
Holiday rentals | Pretty apartment on the first floor of a residential apartment building in the heart of Anglet. Top-quality fittings and tasteful décor. Near shops and bus stop.
One bedroom with 1 double bed. Living room, dining room with television and access to balcony. Fully fitted open plan kitchen opening onto the living room with microwave oven, oven, hot plate for cooking and freezer. Bathroom with bath and washing machine. Balcony. Sheets and household linen provided. Bicycle storage area. Private car parking.
Capacity : 2 persons
Area : 49 m²
Weekly rates:
Low season: 350 € / School holidays, June and September: 380 € / July: 480 € / August: 550 € / Short stays available in the low season (minimum 4 nights): 55 € per night


text:
If you thought the final boss from Blizzard's Diablo III was terrifying, wait until you've got the Prime Evil staring you down in your own living room. Sideshow Collectibles' Diablo polystone statue is truly terrifying.
The second (ignore what I say in the video) of a three-part collaboration with Blizzard Entertainment that began with Arthas from World of Warcraft and ends with the amazing sixth-scale figure of Raynor from StarCraft, Diablo stands more than 20 inches tall from base to pointy back pieces, a grotesquely wonderful rendition of all the evil in the game world embodied in a single being.
As in the game, this is a somewhat more feminine Diablo, with breast plates, a narrow waist and curvaceous legs. Don't get too excited — each of those body parts wants to kill you. If you're a Diablo III player, odds are they already have at least once.
This is not a statue for the weak of heart, nor is it one for the meek of wallet. As with Arthas, Diablo here runs $349.99. Sideshow offers a $70 a month installment plan, though I'm of the mind that if you can't just purchase something smaller than a car outright, maybe you shouldn't purchase it.
First off, let's talk about the box. It's nearly 30 inches tall, and shaped like a PC game box. I could hide my children in it. I haven't yet, but plans are in motion.
Inside the box is a mass quantity of styrofoam — enough to keep evil intact — and the statue itself in several pieces. That's right — Diablo Came In Pieces.
You've got the main figure, with its head and arms. On one of the feet is a power jack, which plugs into the base, a rocky sort of affair with sculpted elements at the bottom.
Under the base is a panel where three batteries go. These make the statue light up, like this:
The rest of the contents consist of the smaller limbs and various spiky protrusions, a pair of breast plates, and the skull poles. I love saying skull poles.
There are no instructions in the box, so you'll have to know what the statue looks like in order to place everything correctly. That's fine. If you purchased a $349.99 statue without knowing what it looked like, you deserve some extra confusion.
Put them all together and what do you get? This thing.
The Design — Statues based on modern are usually either interpreted by a third party or copied directly from an in-game model, often to hilarious effect. For Diablo, Sideshow Collectibles creative director Tom Gilliland and Blizzard cinematics creative director Nick Carpenter collaborated to bring this version of the ultimate evil to life, so I get the feeling this is how Blizzard sees Diablo looking in real life. She (yeah, that's the pronoun I'm going to use here) actually looks kind of sexy, in a hideous and malevolent sort of way. Don't judge me.
The Details — One part dragon, one part living lava flow. Where Diablo isn't covered with scales, her crimson skin is pocked with what looks like rock cooling atop a lava flow. Even before the lights are turned on, the statue looks hot to the touch. It's a level of detail I never would have noticed in the game itself — and not just because I was busy running for my life.
That Glow — Somehow 'icing on the cake' doesn't quite fit here. The statue's light-up gimmick adds an extra dimension of creepy to the piece. Imagine waking up in the middle of the night at your computer desk, and all you can see is this:
That is not a good way to wake up. Also, an awesome way to wake up.
Stability — Though Diablo's pieces fit together well, and some of the more fragile-looking extra bits are secured via magnets, the feeling I get when I transport the statue from once surface to the other is that it's going to fall over at any moment. The main body wobbles slighty, and while it hasn't been enough to cause an accident, it's got me on edge. It doesn't help that the wobbling makes the lights go on and off.
I know, I know — you aren't supposed to walk around with a statue in your hands.
Batteries — Some of Sideshow's other premium statues have come with a power adapter to handle lighting, which makes much more sense for a display piece. You give me a thing that glows, and I would like it to glow all the time, no matter the cost.
The all-new, all-powerful version of Diablo is one of my favorite aspects of the third installment of Blizzard's series, and this is the ultimate evolution of his or her (whatever) combined form. It's the stuff very good bad dreams are made of.
The Diablo Polystone Statue is now available for order at Sideshow Collectibles' website for $349.99. Expected ship date is December 2013.
Update: Sideshow and Jinx are co-sponsoring a giveaway for the Diablo statue here.


text:
Become a Fire Fighter
Recruit School Application
Steps to becoming a Fire Fighter
What kind of student am I?
Course Information
Using VA Benefits
Reinstate My Firefighter I Certification
Recertification Explanation
Steps for Re-Instating Fire Fighter I Certification
Course Information
Course Syllabus
Before Coming to Class
Schedule a Certification Exam
Transfer My Certifications
Transfer Out of State Fire Fighter I Certification
Transfer Out of State Volunteer Fire Fighter Certification
Use My VA Benefits
Report a LODD
Find the Campus
Certification Courses
Alabama Smoke Diver
Airport Fire Fighter
Facility Fire Brigade >
Facility Fire Brigade Advanced Exterior Member
Facility Fire Brigade Incipient Member
Facility Fire Brigade Leader
Facility Fire Brigade Interior Structural Member
Fire Apparatus Operations >
Fire Apparatus Operator: Aerial
Fire Apparatus Operator: Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting
Fire Apparatus Operator: Mobile Water Supply
Fire Apparatus Operator: Pumper
Fire Fighter >
Fire Fighter I/II
Fire Fighter II
Fire Fighter Bridge
Firefighter I Recertification
Fire Inspector >
Fire Inspector I
Fire Inspector II
Fire Inspector III
Fire Instructor >
Fire Instructor I
Fire Instructor II
Fire Instructor III
Fire Investigator >
Fire Investigator
Fire Investigator II
Fire Officer >
Fire Officer I
Fire Officer II
Fire Officer III
Fire Officer IV
Hazardous Materials/WMD >
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Awareness
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Operations
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Awareness & Operations
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Technician
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Incident Commander
Honor Guard
Live Fire Instructor
Alabama Live Fire Instructor
Live Fire Instructor Crossover
Marine Fire Fighter
Plan Examiner I
Public Fire & Life Safety Educator >
Public Fire & Life Safety Educator I
Public Fire & Life Safety Educator II
Public Information Officer
Public Safety Telecommunicator I/II
Rapid Intervention Crew Member
Rescue Technician >
RT: Cave I/II
RT: Cave I/II Non-Cert
RT: Confined Space I/II
RT: Dive I
RT: Refreshers
RT Refresher I
RT Refresher II
RT: Rope
RT Rope I
RT Rope II
RT: Structural Collapse I/II
RT: Surface Water I/II
RT: Swiftwater I/II
RT: Trench I/II
RT: Vehicle and Machinery Extrication I
RT: Wilderness I/II
Safety Officer >
Fire Department: Incident Safety Officer
Fire Department Safety Officer: Health and Safety Officer
Volunteer Firefighter
Blocks Started Prior to July 2020
VFF: Block 1
VFF: Block 2
VFF: Block 3
Modules Started After July 2020
VFF: Module I
VFF: Module II
VFF: Module III
Emergency Care Provider
Emergency Medical Responder
Emergency Medical Technician
Advanced EMT
Paramedic >
Entrance Exam
Paramedic - P1
Paramedic - P2
EMS 189: Applied Anatomy & Physiology for the Paramedic
Paramedic - P3
Program Performance
EMS-Basic Life Support Healthcare Provider
Law Enforcement First Responder Tactical Casualty Care
Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC)
Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC)
Emergency Vehicle Operator - Ambulance
Non-Certification Courses
Apparatus Operator Refresher
Basic >
Basic Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus
Basic Pump Operations
Basic Fire Investigator
Basic Fire Attack
Basic Air Ambulance Operations
Child Safety Restraint Educator
Crash Victim Extrication
Emergency Response to Terrorism >
ERT: Basic Concepts
ERT: Incident Management
ERT: Strategic Considerations: Command Officer
ERT: Tactical Considerations: Company Officer
ERT: Tactical Considerations: Emergency Medical Services
ERT: Tactical Considerations: Hazardous Materials
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Everyone Goes Home >
Everyone Goes Home: Courage to Be Safe
Everyone Goes Home: Leadership Accountability Culture & Knowledge
Fireground Strategy and Tactics
Firemanship >
Firemanship Essentials I
Firemanship Intermediate II
Fire Suppression Tactics & Strategy
Hazardous Materials Technician Refresher
Incident Safety Officer
Live Fire Awareness
Leadership >
Firefighter Safety and Survival: The Company Officers Responsibility
Managing and Leading a Diverse Workforce
Leadership Development & Decision Making >
Leadership Development and Decision Making: Chief Officer
Leadership Development and Decision Making: Company Officer
Leadership Development and Decision Making: Firefighter
Leadership: Strategies >
Leadership I: Strategies for Company Success
Leadership II: Strategies for Personal Success
Leadership III:Strategies for Supervisory Success
Shaping the Future
Strategy and Tactics for Small Fire Departments
Mobile Fire Suppression >
Mobile Fire Suppression Training
Mobile Unit: Fire Apparatus Operator Driver Simulator
New Fire Chief >
New Fire Chief: Administrative Issues
New Fire Chief: Challenging Issues
Propane Emergencies
Rural Water Supply Seminar
Service Testing: Pumpers-Hydrants-Hose
Specialized First Responder >
Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response
Arson Detection for the First Responder
Autism Awareness for First Responders
Barn Fire Response
Cancer Awareness
Natural Gas Emergencies
School Bus Extrication
Traffic Incident Management System
Rail Safety for Emergency Responders
Truck Company Operations >
Truck Company Operations - 40 Hour
Truck Company Operations - 16 Hour
Alabama Residential Fire Sprinkler Installer Course
PEER Support
Fee-Waived Courses
Course Delivery Methods
Certification Course Criteria
Web Enhanced Classes
AFC Calendar
Campus Course Calendar - List View
Field Courses Scheduled
What Region Am I In?
Regional Training Center Network
Regional Training Centers
Anniston Regional Training Center
Birmingham Regional Training Center
Decatur Regional Training Center
Dothan Regional Training Center
Fort Payne Regional Training Center
Fort Rucker Regional Training Center
Huntsville Regional Training Center
Mobile Regional Training Center
Muscle Shoals Regional Training Center
Orange Beach/CSU Regional Training Center
Prattville Regional Training Center
Shelby County Regional Training Center
Extension Training Centers
Albertville Extension Training Center
Bay Minette Extension Training Center
Daphne Extension Training Center
Eufaula Extension Training Center
Florence Extension Training Center
Ozark Extension Training Center
Tallassee Extension Training Center
Thorsby Extension Training Center
Apply For A Field Course
Mobile Training Fleet
The InVEST Program
Field Course Designation
LODD Response
Certification Search
Department Search
Certification Manual-PDF
Proctor Resources
Evaluator Training
DoD Information
VA Benefits
AFC Bookstore
Lending Library
COVID19 Updates
COVID19 Response Volunteer Training
About Alabama Fire College
Welcome to AFC
Mission & Vision
Employee Directory
Map and Directions
Financial Disclosure
Compliance Procedures
Current Year
Contact Us
Personnel Standards and Education Commission
Enabling Legislation
Rules & Regulations
Code Book
Admissions Applications
Student Services
Lodging & Dining
Student Policies
Request a Transcript
Current Tuition Rates
Forms and Resources
AFC Forms
Certification Course Resources
Testing Information Page
CPAT Information
CPAT Locations
CPAT Videos
Instructor Resources
Fire Training Instructor
Certification Lookup
Department Certification Search
Certification Search
AFC Bookstore
Alabama Firefighter Memorial
Alabama Occupational Employment Statistics
AL Power Safe-T-Zone
Alabama Public Safety Leadership Academy
Fire Explorers
Peer Support Resources
Alabama First Responder Peer Support
The Code Green Campaign
IAFF Center of Excellence for Behavioral Health Treatment & Recovery
Near Miss Reporting
Share the Load Support Program
Veterans: Make the Connection
Job Board
Risk Reduction
Get Alarmed Alabama!
Turn Your Attention to Fire Prevention
AsureForce Time Sheet
Retirement Systems of Alabama
Tag List
Tag Eligibility Info
Paid FF List
VFF Tag List
Retired FF Tag List
UL FSRI Fire Safety Academy
Site Search
Courses This Month
Fire Instructor III
Alabama Fire College & Personnel Standards & Education Commission
Fire Inspector II
Alabama Fire College & Personnel Standards & Education Commission
Fire Investigator I
Alabama Fire College & Personnel Standards & Education Commission
Fire Officer III
Alabama Fire College & Personnel Standards & Education Commission
Fire Investigator II
Dothan Regional Training Center
Fire Officer I
Alabama Fire College - Web Enhanced Class
Fire Officer III
Alabama Fire College - Web Enhanced Class
Fire Officer IV
Alabama Fire College - Web Enhanced Class
Fire Fighter I/II
Montgomery Fire Department
Fire Fighter I/II Orientation
Huntsville Fire & Rescue
Fire Fighter I/II
Huntsville Fire & Rescue
Fire Fighter I/II Orientation
Huntsville Fire & Rescue
Fire Fighter I/II
Mobile Fire Rescue Department
Fire Fighter I/II Orientation
Mobile Fire Rescue Department
Live Fire Instructor Crossover
Fort Payne Regional Training Center
Live Fire Instructor Crossover
Albertville Extension Training Center
Fire Instructor III
Dothan Regional Training Center
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Awareness & Operations
Centre Volunteer Fire Department
Hazardous Materials/WMD - Awareness & Operations
Vinemont-Providence Fire Department
VFF: Module III
Pine Level Volunteer Fire Department
Fire Apparatus Operator: Pumper
Trussville Fire & Rescue
Basic Search and Rescue
Huguley Fire Department
Fire Apparatus Operator: Pumper
Dothan Fire Department
Child Safety Restraint Educator
Hoover Fire Department
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Dothan Fire Department
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Demopolis Fire and Rescue
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Ardmore Volunteer Fire Department
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Loxley Volunteer Fire Department
Emergency Vehicle Driver
Oyster Bay Volunteer Fire Department
Your UserID is the first 4 letters of your last name and your birthdate (xx/xx/xxxx)
User ID:
New to the site? Register.
Forgot Password?
UserID Example: smit01/01/1971
Please email
with any login issues.
Connect with us
Alabama Fire College and Personnel Standards Commission | 2501 Phoenix Dr - Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35405 | Toll Free: 1 (800) 241-2467 - Fax: 205-391-3757


text:
MSCI Indexes are recalculated daily around 1830 EDT. During this time the index levels may be unavailable for a short period of time.
Copyright MSCI Inc.
This data is the exclusive property of MSCI Inc. (MSCI) and may not be reproduced or redisseminated in any form without prior written permission from MSCI. This information is provided on an "as is" basis, and the user of this information assumes the entire risk of any use made of this information. Neither MSCI nor any other party makes any express or implied warranties or representations with respect to this information (or the results to be obtained by the use thereof), and MSCI hereby expressly disclaims all warranties of originality, accuracy, completeness, merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose with respect to any of this information. Without limiting any of the foregoing, in no event shall MSCI or any other party have any liability for any direct, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or any other damages (including lost profits) even if notified of the possibility of such damages. MSCI and the MSCI indexes are services marks of MSCI.


text:
Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker PG-13
play trailer
Play Trailer
Play Trailer
No one's ever really gone... Rey's journey continues and the Skywalker saga concludes in Star Wars.
2 hr. 22 min.
Opened December 20th, 2019
Rated PG-13 for sci-fi violence and actionCastMark Hamill, Andy Serkis, John Boyega, Lupita Nyong'o, Daisy RidleyDirectorJ.J. AbramsWriterJ.J. Abrams
Derek Connolly


text:
I have been using TEBE successfully (so I think, anyway) and really appreciate the program. I just had a major meltdown and as a result ending up losing all TB data for a ten day period so I am a bit paranoid... As a result I have been backing up two or three times a day…
For example, todays results:
Original profile is 9.10 GB.
TEBE backup is 5.49 GB.
The TEBE backup file is nearly 4 GB smaller than the original. Is this normal? I have selected "Full Profile" backup.
Any input would be appreciated. I am doing a manual backup of my profile nightly to make sure….


text:
The South Coast is a region of Southeastern Massachusetts that primarily consists of towns that border Buzzards Bay including Wareham, Marion, Rochester, Mattapoisett, Fairhaven, Dartmouth, and Westport. Residents and visitors can enjoy a variety of beaches ranging from quiet expanses of sand to wind-blown waves ideal for windsurfing, kite boarding, and surfing.
The region offers an array of restaurants to appeal to all sorts of culinary tastes from exotic to home-style. It is widely regarded for cultural events including a nationally recognized symphony (the New Bedford Symphony), live theatre and concerts at the Zeiterion theatre, world class museums (the New Bedford Whaling Museum and Battleship Cove), preserved historic districts, colorful ethnic celebrations and more.
No results found.
No results found.
I want to sign in using my existing account on:


text:
Extended Writing-to-Learn Strategies
Writing enables students to process, organize, formulate, and extend their thinking about what they have been learning. In addition, teachers can also assign writing to help students evaluate what they know and understand about a topic. These writing-to-learn strategies help foster students' abilities to make predictions, build connections, raise questions, discover new ideas, and promote higher-level thinking.
In this article:
The Shrinklit is a poetic form used to synthesize literature. Poetry has been used for years in many content areas to enhance curricula and assist in the learning of concepts, and when students use poetry to recall their thinking, they are more likely to remember it. The use of poetry clarifies concepts in ways that direct instructional methods cannot. Thus, writing a Shrinklit — a short, poetic summary of chapters or short pieces of literature — is an effective tool for learning (Sagoff, 1971).
Steps for the Shrinklit strategy
- Ask students to choose a few chapters in a novel or a short piece of literature.
- Tell them to write a poem that focuses on the main ideas in the assigned piece of literature.
- The poem should be at least 10 lines long.
- They should use figurative language (alliteration, personification, similes, etc).
- Students should share their ideas with a small group of students or with the class.
Probable Passages
Probable Passages (Wood, 1984) is a writing strategy based upon snippets of actual texts that students use to predict the content of the passage from which the text has been snipped. Probable Passages encourages readers to make connections to what they already know (their prior knowledge), as well as to their own experiences, other texts they have read, and their knowledge of the world, to predict what ideas and concepts the text they are about to read might contain. Probable Passages makes students aware of both the story structure found in narrative writing, and, as Readence, Bean, and Baldwin (2004) note, the text structures writing. Students utilize a list of vocabulary words to predict the content of what they are to read. Overall, however, the real power of the Probable Passages strategy is that it helps students scaffold their self-monitoring abilities, so they become aware of when their reading and writing fails to make sense, thus fostering both recall and comprehension. In order for this strategy to be successful, the teacher should model this strategy before students use it independently.
Steps for Probable Passages
- To begin, prepare a list of vocabulary words that contains important concepts from the text and that represents the categories in either the narrative or expository text to be studied. For example, if the text is narrative, include words that reflect the characters, setting, problem, and outcomes, and if the text is expository, include words that relate to the specific text structure, such as cause-effect, comparison-contrast, and problem-solution.
- Present the list to the students, and identify the specific text structure utilized. For clarity, students can be given a template that reflects the elements of the text's structure.
- For narrative texts, students place each vocabulary word in the category (characters, setting, problem, or outcomes) where they feel it most likely belongs, and then they write a probable passage that reflects what they think the text might say.
- For expository text, Readence et al. (2004) suggest that you choose one category of the text structure — such as the problem in the problem-solution structure, the comparison in the comparison-contrast structure, or the effect in the cause-effect structure — and ask students to do the following:
- First, develop a text frame that relates to the category, with blanks where the selected vocabulary words would fit. Students then fit the selected words into the text frame.
- Next, develop a second text frame that supplies a beginning sentence that foreshadows the second part of the text structure — such as the solution in the problem — solution structure, the contrast in the comparison-contrast structure, or the cause in the cause-effect structure — and ask students to try to write a probable passage.
Guided Writing Procedure
The Guided Writing Procedure (GWP) (Smith & Bean, 1980) is a strategy that is based on a three-day process that enhances comprehension by fostering the students' ability to synthesize and retain the content area material they have been studying. According to Smith and Bean, the Guided Writing Procedure is designed to:
- activate and sample students' prior knowledge about a topic to be studied before they begin learning about it.
- sample and evaluate how well students can express their thoughts in writing in a specific content area discipline.
- improve the students' overall writing abilities through careful thought and revision.
While the GWP may seem to be time consuming, the research of Konopak et al. (1987) illustrates that if students use this strategy, the quality of their writing is greatly improved, because they are able to integrate their prior knowledge about the topic of study with what they learn from a text and then produce a carefully edited, readable piece of writing. This improvement in the students' writing is facilitated by the teacher's continual monitoring of that writing, which guides the students' editing and revision processes and eventually leads to a well-thought-out and developed piece of content area writing. In effect, "the GWP is an in-depth exploration of a text reading assignment" (Readence et al. 2004, p. 196), and this is an exploration we sincerely want our students to make.
Steps for the Guided Writing ProcedureDay 1:
- Students brainstorm what they know about an upcoming topic of study and record their responses, including a list of terms relative to the topic.
- After students have developed the list, instruct them to identify categories that encompass the brainstormed terms and list details that support their choices of categories.
- Next, students incorporate the terms and details in an organized form, such as an outline, web, or graphic organizer.
- Finally, using the outline, web, or graphic organizer as a guide and a rubric for good writing, students write a short paragraph depicting what they know about the topic. This is a first draft.
- When students have completed their first drafts, collect them and evaluate them on the basis of good writing criteria. Readence et al. (2004) suggest that these criteria are topic, supporting details, logical flow, word choice, grammar, and mechanics. These criteria are best judged through the use of a rubric. Note: During this first phase of the GWP, read the students' drafts, but do not make any discernible marks on the manuscripts.
- Return the students' first drafts along with a copy of the rubric used to evaluate the drafts.
- Using the evaluation rubric, students edit or revise their first drafts. The resulting papers become their second drafts.
- Students turn in their second drafts and the original rubric for a second round of teacher evaluation.
- At this point, give students a reading assignment related to the topic of study. Tell students that the purpose of the reading is to locate additional ideas, details, and examples to add to their writing.
- As they did on Day 1, students need to record the new information garnered from their reading and add it to their original outlines, graphic organizers, or webs. (Note: Students may need help in this revision process as they add and delete information.)
- Finally, armed with this new information, students develop their final drafts. This final draft now contains an integration of information from the students' prior knowledge as well as what was learned from the text, lectures, videos, etc.
Multigenre Report
The Multigenre Report is a creative approach guaranteed to motivate students to write to learn. First proposed by Romano (2000), the Multigenre Report is simply a collection of student written pieces of varying genres that depict a central theme or topic that students have studied about. The pieces they write can include a variety of compositions: narratives, expositions, poems, songs, raps, letters, memos, notes, diaries, journals, essays, lists, scripts, newspaper articles, editorials, advertisements, birth certificates or announcements, death certificates, obituaries, and even drawings. They can be of varying lengths as well. Moulton (1999), Allen (2001) and Grierson, Anson, and Baird (2002) all present variations of the Multigenre Report by suggesting that it can be utilized as a research project or an author study wherein students compose a collage of creative compositions that reflect what they have learned from researching a topic.
While Tama and McClain (2001) stress the value of using the Multigenre Report as a research project, they note that its open-ended nature may be disconcerting to students who need more structure. As a result, they suggest that teachers provide clear parameters and directions for their students, such as stipulating the number and types of genres to be included as well as the specific components to be developed, such as a table of contents, endnotes, and a bibliography. See a cross-curricular Multigenre Report for science, English, social studies, and consumer studies, based on an endangered species.
Click the "References" link above to hide these references.Allen, C. A. (2001). The multigenre research paper. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Grierson, S.T., Anson, A. & Baird, J. (2002). Exploring the past through multigenre writing. Language Arts, 80(1), 51-59.
Konopak, B.C., Martin, M.A., & Martin, S.H. (1987). Reading and writing: Aids to learning in the content areas. Journal of Reading, 31(2), 109-115.
Moore, D.W., & Moore, S.A. (1986). Possible Sentences. In E.K. Dishner, T.W. Bean, J.E. Readence & D.W. Moore (Eds.), Reading in the content areas (pp. 174-179). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Moulton, M.R. (199). The multigenre paper: increasing interest, motivation and functionality in research. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 42(7), 528-539.
Readence, J.E., Bean, T.W. & Baldwin, R.S. (2004). Content area literacy: An integrated approach. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Romano, T. (2000). Blending genre: Altering style. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Sagoff, M. (1971). Shrinklits. New York: Doubleday.
Smith, S. & Bean, R. (1980). The guided writing procedure: Integrating content reading and writing improvement. Reading World 19(3), 290-294.
Tama, M.C., & McClain, A.B. (2001). Guiding reading and writing in the content areas: Practical strategies Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Wood, K.D. (1984). Probable passages: A writing strategy. The Reading Teacher 37(5), 496-499.
Sejnost, R.L. & Thiese, S.M. (2010). Building Content Literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Comments and Recommendations
18 recommendations


text:
These graffiti artists were pretty brazen. In broad daylight. With ladders and scaffolding. And a tent for shade. I was going to call the police but I decided to let them finish first because I am a supporter of culture and the arts. I'll call the cops tomorrow. Maybe...
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Posted by Ka`iana at 8:21 PM
0 comments:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
November 2, 2017United States
On Friday, President Donald J. Trump will start a two week trip that includes visits to Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Recent resources from the Council on Foreign Relations…
December 26, 2012Global
Five global think tank leaders examine the increasingly complex global challenges and the role of the international community in confronting them.
August 23, 2012United States
Experts from three countries offer their views about the role foreign policy might play in U.S. political conventions and what interest there is from the perspective of their countries.
December 23, 2011Social Issues
Experts forecast the five most consequential trends in 2012, following a year in which the global economy struggled amid high unemployment and mounting debt crises.
October 20, 2011Democracy
Post-Qaddafi Libya will face difficulties with rebel infighting, the anger of Qaddafi loyalists, and more, but the long-time dictator's death also creates an opening for a more peaceful country. CFR'…
August 22, 2011Homeland Security
Which policies have worked and which ones need work ten years after the worst terrorist attacks in U.S. history? CFR experts examine ten issues that have preoccupied U.S. planners.
July 18, 2011United States
Can the United States improve its energy security in a clean, affordable, and efficient way? Five experts offer solutions to the daunting energy challenges facing the United States.
June 23, 2011Afghanistan
Did President Obama's troop drawdown plan for Afghanistan undercut the campaign against the Taliban or was it too limited to meet U.S. goals? CFR President Richard N. Haass and Senior Fellow Max Boot…
May 2, 2011Afghanistan
Osama bin Laden's death is a real and symbolic blow to al-Qaeda, and its stature in the Middle East is already diminished by the pro-democracy movements in the region, but the group remains lethal. S…
April 5, 2011United States
How can the United States improve its aging infrastructure to maintain its global economic competitiveness? Four experts offer their suggestions and discuss the implications of inaction.


text:
I had a chance to try out Tutti Frutti a few weeks ago at Kota Kemuning. Apparently, Tutti Frutti is a popular soft serve frozen yogurt from USA and is currently franchised by Naza Group of Companies in Malaysia.
What is interesting about Frutti Tutti is that the customers can get to pick and choose the yogurt flavours using the dispensing machine.
Once the cup is filled, the cashier will weigh the cup and the price will be determined accordingly. There are also numerous choices of toppings to add up to the yogurt.
I took the blueberry flavour which costs RM 14.60 @ 275 gm. Taste wise, it was a bit sour but the texture was certainly smooth and creamy.
Besides being a delicious snack, it is interesting to know that yogurt is a good source of protein, calcium, riboflavin and vitamin B 12.
Tutti Frutti Frozen Yogurt
No.67, Jalan Anggerik Vanilla N 31/N
40460 Shah Alam
Kota Kemuning
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Location Map


text:
VI. Contracting Agency Responsibilities
How do workers on a construction site know that a project is covered by the Davis-Bacon Act? How do they know the prevailing wage to which they are entitled?
The wage determination (including any additional classifications and wage rates conformed) and a Davis-Bacon poster (WH-1321) must be posted at all times by the contractor and its subcontractors at the site of the work in a prominent and accessible place where it can be easily seen. The WH-1321 poster may be obtained at no charge from offices of the Wage and Hour Division. In the absence of such posted information, any person who wants to determine if the project is covered should contact the federal agency funding or assisting the project or the Wage and Hour Division. Multi-year construction contracts that contain option provisions by which a contracting agency may unilaterally extend the term of the contract require inclusion of a current wage determination at the time the option is exercised. (In contrast, in situations where a contractor is given additional time to complete original contract commitments, the wage determination in that contract applies).