text:
Here is the BBC Question Time about 9/11 (aired September 13, 2001) :
You may have heard mention of it or seen it at the time. It is … interesting. The BBC director general at the time said of it :
he "would like to apologise to the viewers who were offended by it".
He added that it was an inappropriate programme to broadcast live just two days after the suicide attacks on America, and should have been recorded and edited.
The BBC's Media Correspondent, Nick Higham, said there was a recognition in the corporation that the audience could have been more representative of wider opinion.
Besides the shouting and jeering from the audience, there are a few points I'd like to highlight. Note the number of people (including the panelists) who attribute their own hobbyhorse as the cause of 9/11. Also, note some curious rhetorical techniques on display.
At about 21:29 (in the first clip), a guy says American & British aircraft flying over the skies of Iraq and Yugoslavia have done so in defense of Kurds, Iraqi Shia and muslims in Kosovo and is promptly jeered and shouted down. The counter arguments seems to be "You have no idea!", the idea that the only acceptable way to frame it is as killing muslims and that asserting things repeatedly makes it true.
At about 21:25 Yasmin Alibhai-Brown says to applause "I have been stunned by the way Americans are so shocked at how many people really truly detest them around the world."
Speaking for myself, I don't care if someone detests Americans. Oh, imagine the burden it must be to forever be wondering who a majority of Namibians consider to be their Super-Best-Friend-Forever. Treating global politics like high school cliques really doesn't seem like the best way to determine policies.
Below the fold is parts 2 & 3 of the video and a transcript.
(The transcript's timestamps are based on those printed at the top of the video. A "______" in the transcript represents something said that I can't make out. Presented here for future reference and those who can't see the video.)
BBC Guy : But first here's David Dimbleby with a special edition of Question Time. David.
David Dimbleby : Good evening. The full horror of Tuesday's terrorist attacks is still sinking in as more and more gruesome details are being reported. Several hundred Britons are now feared dead and the question on many people's minds is how the United States should respond and what role the United Kingdom and the NATO allies should play in that response. Arguments range from mounting all out war against terrorists and those who harbor them on the one hand and, on the other, examining the whole American strategy in the Middle East. So, with us here tonight to discuss these issues : Lord Ashdown the former leader of the Liberal-Democrats. Philip Lader who is the American ambassador here until February of this year. He served 4 years. Tam Dalyell, father of the house, the longest serving member and a critic of Western policy towards the Middle East and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown columnist for the Independent and, of course, our Question Time audience are going to be putting the questions tonight and the first one comes from Wally Bacari (sp.) who's an administrator. Bacari (sp.)
audience member #1 Wally Bacari (sp.) : Thank you, good evening. And my question is to former ambassador Lader. In the midst of this carnage won't a harder response provoke more um … won't a harder response provoke more actions that will effect innocent lives?
David Dimbleby : So a hard response will provoke more violence. I'll come to Mr. Lader in a moment. Paddy Ashdown, what's your answer there?
Paddy Ashdown : Yes it could. Um, and I think that's a matter we have to bear very carefully in mind. I mean, one thing is clear : after Tuesday nothing is ever going to be the same again. The Era of the superpower, alone, invincible and inviolate is gone. We're now into the era of globalized power and globalized terror to match it and to the extent to which we are able to combat this will be measured by the extent to which we are able to act internationally and multilaterally; not unilaterally. The second point is the one you identified precisely, Mr Bacari (sp.) If we mishandle this I, I fear it's not impossible to see this as the first in the chain of events that leads this to war between nations. Maybe not ourselves, but in the regions that are effected. We need to bear in mind one fact when deciding what to do and that fact is this : What was the aim of the terrorists? The aim of the terrorists was to provoke us into overreaction in exactly the same way as Israel has been provoked into overreaction by suicide bombers in their cities. And the…
Paddy Ashdown : provoke… provoke… to provoke us into deepening the instability in those areas that they want to see war and conflict and the extent to which our actions result in that outcome will be the extent to which they continue to win and they continue to lose.
David Dimbleby : Is there a danger of that happening do you believe?
Paddy Ashdown : Well, intemperate action, I mean, ambassador Lader said today that he hoped his government – he believed his government would act in a measured proportionate and a precisely targeted way and I hope that is right. In this sense this is a war for all of us. I don't like the overuse of the word war exactly but this is a conflict for all of us and one we must win and in this sense the United States and the United States President now acts as a leader, not just for the United States, but for the whole world. The most precious asset that we have is that coalition of revulsion that has now sprung up across the world including in places where are not normally allies for the United States. And that must be maintained.
David Dimbleby : Okay, I'm going to the man in the back there with the spectacles. I want to get as many people as I can in. And, you sir.
audience member #2 : _______ these days you keep using the word "war"? Who are you fighting with? This Lim Baden (aka Osama Bin Laden -ed.) or whatever his name was is not unheard of _______ of any country. Is a Saudi Arabian who live in Afghanistan.
David Dimbleby : So, if we're declaring war who are we declaring it against?
audience member #2 : Who are you going to be killing? Innocent people.
David Dimbleby : Philip Lader. Philip Lader.
Philip Lader : I want to respond to both questions if I can. I think there is great truth in your point. As Paddy suggested there it is my view, just as one citizen, that the response must be purposeful, measured and proportionate. The difficulty is we should not – even though the Secretary of State has indicated who the leading candidate, as culprit, might be – we should not rush to judgement. Until it's established with certainty who is to blame.
Philip Lader : but at that point, not simply as an act of retribution, but also as a means of prevention of further atrocities the United States, I believe as a citizen, should take appropriate, measured, purse-purposeful, proportionate response
David Dimbleby : Those adjectives are fine but what do they actually mean in terms of what you do?
Philip Lader : That has to be determined once you decide what the target is, what is the group
David Dimbleby : (interrupting) would you rule anything out? Would you rule out an invasion of Afghanistan? Would you be prepared to see that?
Philip Lader : The advice…
David Dimbleby : (interrupting) Land troops in Afghanistan.
Philip Lader : The advice given to our president will be across this entire range. Those who are motivated by anger or believe that huge volume of response is necessary to those who believe that simply a law abiding judiciary proceeding is what's appropriate. But I believe though I must say that with the seasoned veterans surrounding this president we are most likely to have what is a deliberative, rational process of determining that response
David Dimbleby : Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, do you think that can be achieved?
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : I'm not sure. I think some of the rhetoric that is coming out – of course it's understandable I mean what has happened is, is impossible, um, to cope with even as –from this distance. But I think there are certain things that Americans – and I do make a distinction between America and Americans – I think Americans are going to have to look at a lot of new realities. I have been stunned by the way Americans are so shocked at how many people really, truly detest them around the world. I think this is…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : something that should worry all of us, right? I think, in part, as you know, as some groups have demonized Americans as much as Americans have demonized us but
David Dimbleby : (interrupting) I want to stop you; but what you're saying, hold on a second We're going to come to that in a moment
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : But what I did
David Dimbleby : Can you just answer the specific question about action and about whether it's possible
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : The action has got to take these facts into account. You can't just go out there and storm. I think you have to be measured and accurate but also some of these lessons have got to talked about before any action is taken
David Dimbleby : do you think there should be any military action of any kind or would you prefer to see nothing done
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : Once we know. Once we know. Once we really know. Yes, I think some action will have to be taken
David Dimbleby : the woman in pink there. Can't hear you sorry
audience member #3 : the panel's briefly talked about America wanting to establish blame before they actually take action but how long does the panel think Americans will wait before blame is established
David Dimbleby : Tam Dalyell
Tam Dalyell : In the case of Lockerbie blame takes a very long time. But, you know, if innocent people are killed just because of a feeling that we must do something that will make the situation worse and not better.
Tam Dalyell : Those
Tam Dalyell : If innocent people are killed there is one group who will be delighted Bin Laden and his like and why? Because Arab sympathy, genuine Arab sympathy with the United States will simply evaporate when there is innocent, gratuitous loss of life : collateral damage or call it what you will.
David Dimbleby : Alright, I take your point. Woman in the third row from the back there and then I'm going to move on to the next question. You madam.
Audience Member #4 : What scares me about the use of the word "war" at the moment is… um… the grim task of counting the dead is still not finished in America. How can we as a… um, a democratic nation justify killing other mothers, fathers, children of another nation?
David Dimbleby : Let me ask quite simply if anybody in the audience disagrees with that point of view and believes America should act and act swiftly. You sir, on the left here.
Audience Member #5 : Americans have been innocently killed, Tam Dalyell. You always come on the side of the terrorists and have done for years.
Tam Dalyell : no
(rumbling from the audience)
Tam Dalyell : That I refute. I simply point out that when President Bush says that this is the first war of the 21st century it's not so. (smattering of applause) A war has been going on for ten years of the daily bombing of Iraq.
(applause and hoots from the audience)
Tam Dalyell : Now, maybe it's the brothers and sisters of these people who are the recruits that evil men, like Bin Laden, like to exploit. These are very unpalatable facts that better be addressed.
David Dimbleby : Ok, the man in the front row there.
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : reason why there's, uh, British and American pilots are risking their lives is to defend the Kurds in northern Iraq and to defend the Shia muslims of southern Iraq who are in danger from Saddam Hussein. We remember Halabja (the poison gas attack on Kurds -ed) I think we should thank the Americans for defending muslims not only in Iraq but also in Kosovo
(audience gets restless)
Audience Member #7 : mean killing. You mean killing
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : No, no, no, no
Audience Member #7 : (unclear what is said)
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : The American are defending muslims in Iraq, they're defending muslims in Kosovo
(a smattering of audience applause and increasing audience shouting)
Audience Member #7 (woman in tan headscarf) : They're killing them!
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : (crosstalk) they set up the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinians wouldn't have a
David Dimbleby : Hold on, let…
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : They defended the muslims in Kuwait…
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : they do not!
David Dimbleby : …finish his point
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : Don't you dare speak on behalf of the muslims. Don't you dare speak on behalf of the muslims! You have no idea! You have no idea! You have no idea!
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : why don;'t you …the Russians … Why don't you attack the Russians when they launch an all out assault on the Chechens based on a terrorist act
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : We did!
Audience Member #6 (man in stars & stripes tie) : I never heard you. I never heard you. The left is silent when it comes to Russia. Silent when it comes to Russia. Silent when it's the Chinese persecuting…
(lots of crosstalk in above)
David Dimbleby : Stop! Stop! Stop!
David Dimbleby : Sir, you made your point. You made your point. Wait.
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : Americans or British
David Dimbleby : Will you be quiet. Will you be quiet. It's all right. Would you like just to make your point
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : …my Arab and muslim colleagues. I'm an Anglo-Arab born and raised in Britain and we never condone violence or killings of Americans or Brits. We don't… Our friends our being killed. In New York we have friends we have relatives being killed and we've been also victims of attacks, I mean, from Sudan to Libya to Palestine. So we, more than anyone else, and in Palestine know what it means to be killed.
David Dimbleby : ok,
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : (unclear)
David Dimbleby : I want to take
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : I don't, I didn't… I don't appreciate this gentleman with the American tie…
David Dimbleby : You've made your point
Audience Member #8 (woman in blue shirt) : thank you
David Dimbleby : I want… I want …
(shout from audience)
David Dimbleby : Nope, I want to have a question from Charles Pfennig (sp.) who's a facilities operator to take this argument on. Mister Pfennig.
Audience Member #9 (Charles Pfenning) : Good evening. Um, Paddy spoke of the dangers of overreacting, does the panel think that Britain should join America in whatever course of action America now takes?
David Dimbleby : Philip Lader.
Philip Lader : I will come back to that in a moment…
David Dimbleby : Well, why not answer it straight
Philip Lader : I'll answer straight then
Audience Member #9 (Charles Pfenning) : Whatever
Philip Lader : Terrific moderator isn't he?
(crowd laughter and something unclear said)
Philip Lader : For the prime minister to have stepped forward forthrightly and immediately in solidarity with the United States is something which we Americans is not only something which we Americans appreciate but is very meaningful. For Lord Robertson and NATO to have taken the action to demonstrate the profound consensus. What we're starting to see is the marshaling of public opinion by President Bush around the world but I want to say in that context in response to your point. I know of no religion or no nationality that has a monopoly on fanaticism and it is a huge error, it is a colossal error…
Philip Lader : for any of us to identify the acts or potential acts of fanatics with the people at large.
(brief applause)
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : Philip, can I just say the last 2 or 3 days it has been rather astonishing and depressing to watch, um, Mr Rubin(?), for example, talking in a language of civilization that…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : it wasn't… absolutely not acceptable. You know, the man who blew up the Oklahoma bomb was American and very uncivilized…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : and I don't think it helps to have somebody saying again and again, repeatedly, that the civilized live in the United States and the rest of the world is a…
David Dimbleby : (interrupts) Well, hold on, just the
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : just very bad.
David Dimbleby : People may not know Mr Rubin but, uh, the foreign Secretary Jack Straw said that this was an attack on civilization. You don't like him saying that?
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : I don't like it. I think Tony Blair has been brilliant, measured, very careful not to say that kind of thing and I think he's done very well
David Dimbleby : Tam Dalyell.
Tam Dalyell : The lady in blue who's Anglo-Arab raised the question of the Sudan. Do you remember that there was the attack on the Al-Shifa Factory supposedly a chemical warfare factory. It turned out to be nothing of the kind and the attack was a huge error. Doesn't that teach us that we ought to be very certain before launching military action against a specific place
David Dimbleby : Paddy Ashdown, if I could, If I could bring you back to the question. The question was whether Britain should stand with America in whatever course of action America now takes.
Paddy Ashdown : I suppose you'd admonish me if I answered any of the others as well but I'll come back to that in a second. The answer to the question should Britain back any action of the United States the answer is obviously no. Nor are…
Paddy Ashdown : Nor, nor are we required to do so. My view is that so far President Bush has handled this with very considerable skill and a very great degree of, um, rationality and I hope that's what will continue. Ah, Britain's role however has been absolutely vital, I think,
————— end of part 1 —————
Paddy Ashdown : in as, ah, Phil said helping and encouraging that process. I think personally that it was right that NATO should invoke article 5 of the NATO constitution for the first time ever. Because the fear in this was that what the United States might do is to retreat into isolationism and unilateralism action and by showing the United States there was an alternative way forward we actually opened up the possibility of a multilateral reaction, international reaction to this …which is, uh, as Phil has said is beginning to grow across the world and that is the most valuable asset we have but and it is a very big but the provisions of NATO – the principles of NATO – are twofold. One is solidarity but the other is consultation. And with the solidarity that we have expressed comes the right to expect consultation. NATO says we stand together but we consult together first and provided that principle is followed and we use the NATO solidarity to grow and maintain the wider asset that we have of support across the world I think it is possible let us at least entertain the thought that what happens is we do not have to use military action but in effect these people are given up to the best solution which is that they should stand trial before the eyes of the world in a court of justice
(smattering of applause)
David Dimbleby : but you're assuming then that… You're assuming…you're saying America shouldn't act unless there's unanimity in NATO or not?
Paddy Ashdown : No, I didn't. I didn't say that. I didn't say that. It is open to America or any coalition to act in preservation of their own self defense if they wish to do so and I want to make it clear that although I believe it is not impossible if we hold together that international, ah, consensus to make sure these people suffer the penalty in a court of law I do not exclude from future action the possibility of direct targeted and precise military action provided the evidence is there to make sure that it is at the right target provided it is precisely targeted and provided it carries the support of the majority of the consensus of nations who would support it.
David Dimbleby : Now, uh… Thank you. I want, I want to bring in a number of people now on what you think Britain should do and the degree to which you would like to see Britain supporting the American administration. The man in the green shirt there over on the left
Audience Member #10 (man in green shirt) : Britain has considerable experience with anti-terrorism measures from it's period in Northern Ireland where, uh, in the early nineties the government opened clandestine links with the IRA to establish a dialogue. Does anyone on the panel think there's any merit in the Americans or any other Western country attempting to open a dialogue with someone perhaps through Arab embassies or governments with whoever has perpetrated this atrocity to find out what is at the root of it and to try and resolve it by negotiated dialogue rather than just brute force and perhaps ignorance.
David Dimbleby : Philip Lader will you take that one
Philip Lader : I think it is mandatory that the president leave every option open to him and to the country and so I would not exclude that necessarily. Would that be popular in public opinion in America today? Certainly not. But I think the President, as Paddy indicated, has adroitly demonstrated that the response will be taking some time and be the result of deliberative process in which no option currently is excluded
David Dimbleby : the man in the green shirt I'll come to you in a moment, the green shirt there
Audience Member #11 (man in jacket with green shirt) : I think Britain should back America 100%. America has done everything for ___________ They, they
(audience laughter)
Audience Member #11 (man in jacket with green shirt) : they defend democracy, they do, America is the right country forward. They defend this world. There's a trouble America goes in first. Europe's cowards : does nothing. Look at Britain, America the tie we have. You get these terrorists running around destroying ______ and they come to England to live.
David Dimbleby : So, you would… you would support any action that President Bush decided to take and think that the British government should support it?
Audience Member #11 (man in jacket with green shirt) : Yes totally and…
David Dimbleby : (interrupts) and what action actually would you like to see taken?
Audience Member #11 (man in jacket with green shirt) : Once you find out who it is I think you should go in hard and take him out.
(mixed jeers and applause from audience)
Audience Member #11 (man in jacket with green shirt) : No, they should. They should take him out…
Tam Dalyell : The man in the green shirt who urged dialogue is spot on. (applause) Because if you want to avoid another tragedy like Manhattan you've got to enter into dialogue. If there's massive retaliation; sure as nuts it'll happen again.
David Dimbleby : ok, lets go, come on over here. On the right here. You sir in… with the pullover. I'll come to you minute
Audience Member #12 (man in tan sweater) : I think terrorism is a global problem and it has to be a global solution. It's very clear to me that there's a need for retribution as well for the American people but I would say that the solution has to be a global one and given the history of America
Tam Dalyell : good (?)
Audience Member #12 (man in tan sweater) : um, uh, taking unilateral action to solve global problems I think it's important that from here onwards seeing as we have a different world situation there should be a global response. World leaders should also step up to the plate and, uh, take an equal part consulting us.
David Dimbleby : Ok, the man in the yellow pullover there you sir. Yes
Audience Member #13 (man in yellow sweater) : directly on a point raised by, importantly by Lord Ashdown I want to know with what right or at least with what consistency can George W. Bush avail himself of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 when even this year he has specifically dismissed for being 30 years old the ABM treaty as being irrelevant to USA's needs? (one lone person applauding) If that wasn't to complicated.
Paddy Ashdown : Well, I'm not sure the 2 are connected and I'm inclined to say may not be popular with you or perhaps other as well I'm not sure the ABM treaty isn't being eroded by events, anyways and we need to think of other ways of preserving our peace. I mean, neither the ABM treaty nor the new missile defense would have prevented what happened on Thursday (he means Tuesday -ed) and I very much agree with the gentleman down here. We are moving into the era of globalized power, globalized capitalism, globalized satellite broadcasting, globalized crime, globalized drugs, globalized terrorism and unless we are prepared to move to where that power has gone, to have globalized institution and globalized governance and a global system of tackling terrorism we will never tackle it. That is the important point.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) Paddy, Paddy, Paddy, it has to be globalized. At the moment everything we call globalized is actually in the control of America and Europe
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : It has got to now… it has got to now , I mean America has now joined the real world in a very horrible way. But we have to now… the hubris of the US – this idea that America is the greatest country in the world – that has to be placed into the more modern reality we all have to share the space and it can not be real globalization when certain countries strut about thinking they're better than everybody else
Paddy Ashdown : fair enough
David Dimbleby : the gentleman in there. what were you saying you interrupted her I didn't hear what you said
Audience Member #14 (man in black) : …strongest economy and sayin' best in the world and everything else and it certainly weren't on Tuesday and I think the reality is we all have to wake up to the fact yes there is global terrorism now and how do we deal with it. But ultimately we have to stand with America as to what's happened
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) sure
Audience Member #14 (man in black) : not once on this program has it been mentioned that tens of thousands of people we killed on Tuesday and
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) I did. No, that's not true
Audience Member #14 (man in black) : and the reality is Americans are
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) that's not true. I started by saying…
Audience Member #14 (man in black) : although we've had some 20 years of this it has been minor in comparison to what has happened on Tuesday and really we should go in some sense of reality not just for what happened in reality but what is going to happen again by a train or by a bus or whatever. and I think we need to grab a sense of that as well.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : Sure.
David Dimbleby : I want to take another specific question from Ian Tungstead (sp.) who's a marketing manager this is about the specifics and lets get back to the specifics now of what should be done. Ian Tungstead (sp.)
Audience Member #15 (man in tan jacket) : If the Taliban do not hand over, um, Osma Bin Laden (aka Osama -ed) for trial, um, should the allies then attack Afghanistan?
David Dimbleby : ok, assuming, assuming that uh um the Americans decide they have evidence against Bin Laden and he's not handed over should the allies invade Afghanistan to capture him? Tam Dalyell.
Tam Dalyell : It depends on whether there would be agreement, for example, from Pakistan. Without Pakistan bases it would be extremely difficult to do so in that mountainous difficult terrain where the Russians came to such grief. There is a practicalities of it and it certainly couldn't be done without killing many tens of thousands of innocent people.
David Dimbleby : ok
Audience Member #16 : (something indistinct)
David Dimbleby : yes
Audience Member #16 : the same thing applies very much to America on Tuesday when tens of thousands of people's lives were put at risk and in addition to that and what seems to have been forgotten by this panel when we're asked if we should support America is this : that we also have lost something like 500 people – innocent people – that had nothing to do with this at all. And if it's a question of whether we should support America in being able to take action in response to that then I'm for supporting America and yes let's take the rest of the world with us but let's not forget that our people have been killed irrespective of everybody else around this world
Tam Dalyell : and what should the object of (crosstalk) no, no, what should the object of our reaction be? Surely, the prime object is to do everything we can to stop it happening again. (applause) Everyone in this room feels for those Americans but
David Dimbleby : you want to come back on that
Audience Member #16 : well, yes, i think anybody wouldn't want this kind of work and danger and damage and sick pain being caused to anybody through out the world but what you've also got to remember : you are referring to things that happened 20 odd years ago how far have we actually got in this world today with stopping terrorism and what action or what plans are there for this world if you like for every country that there is to be involved in it. You honestly believe that people in the Eastern countries will sit round a table and discuss these issues without some kind of action being taken.
Audience Member #17 (unseen woman's voice) : Why assume it was Arabs in the first place?Why assume it was Arabs in the first place?
Tam Dalyell : It's not 20 years ago. it…
Audience Member #18 : (indistinct shouting)
Audience Member #17 : Why assume it was Arabs in the first place?
Audience Member #18 (man in glasses & tie) : __________ That is why we all have this problem… James Ruby maybe (James Rubin? -ed)
David Dimbleby : What, You've got the camera now. you've tried to get on for some time
Audience Member #18 (man in glasses & tie) : no, no, no, no, no, equal opportunity very it is a plan you all do! You see only one fourth of the population as Western civilization! James Ruby (Rubin? –ed.) does not distinction but _______ more than that everybody everything all destroyed! That is how you rule the world now.
David Dimbleby : ok… I go to the man at the back. Second… third row from the back. Yes. you.
Audience Member #19 : I think the ball is firmly in the court of the Taliban government I mean they know where, um, Bin Laden is. They know, There are ways of doing it. it is their obligation, um, if they wanna have any sort of respect – they should have handed him over years ago – but it's their obligation to hand him over now.
David Dimbleby : and if…
Audience Member #19 : and if they do not , and if they do not – and I shouldn't hear that they cannot because they certainly can – if they do not then they should be prepared to suffer the consequences. now that should not mean the slaughtering, uh, of innocent women and children. We've had enough of that already. but
(audience shouting)
Audience Member #19 : uh, they should hand him over immediately otherwise they have to be prepared to face the consequences and I mean hard.
(smattering of applause)
David Dimbleby : Ok, Alibhai
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : I think the whole Taliban regime needs to be looked at and we need to look at what's going on to, y'know what's being done to the people of Afghanistan there as well, it's not just one man and what he's done to the Americans. We have ignored what's being going on in the Afghanistan for a long time so I agree with you we have to some action but there is a lot more going on in Afghanistan than just this one man.
David Dimbleby : Go on.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : And we need… I think one of the things that worries me is that in this whole very emotional period that we only going to end up talking about what happened in the United States and not at… look at Taliban doing to its own people. That is also important.
David Dimbleby : but, but but his point, we'll come back to that in a moment, is that if the Taliban won't hand over Bin Laden then force is legitimately used against …
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) yes or sanctions or whatever it takes
David Dimbleby : force, including force
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : yes
David Dimbleby : all right. you want to come back to it.
Audience Member #19 : I mean she says sanctions. well, I'm sorry we're gonna have to get a bit sterner than that because they should have handed him over years ago because he did a bomb 2 years ago or 3 years ago and if it takes…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : Well, they been propped up! Taliban has been supported by American businessmen. We have to look at that.
(applause and an indistinct shout)
David Dimbleby : I want to take a question from Nick Halpin (sp.) who is a law student. Mr. Halpin (sp.)
Audience Member #20 : Does the bombing in America represent a failure in US foreign policy with millions and millions of people all around the world despising American nation?
David Dimbleby : Philip Lader.
Philip Lader : I'll respond to the last several question as I respond to you. President Bush has made it clear that once it is determined with certainty who is to blame that any nation which harbors such individuals shall also be held accountable…
(shouting from audience)
Philip Lader :I think he has been very clear. I would ask… add to that however that in the context of an analysis not only of technical intelligence matters, transportation security but of fundamental foreign policy in the coming weeks and months. Certainly as you suggest Jasmine we must be reflective on why there are these attitudes towards the United States
(someone in the audience yells something)
Philip Lader : but if I may
David Dimbleby : Let him speak
Philip Lader : if I may
David Dimbleby : he's saying what you're saying, I think
Philip Lader : but if I may… may I continue
David Dimbleby : I'll bring you in. If you listen to him I'll bring you in.
Philip Lader : but that is not a justification for any individual around this globe to celebrate what we've seen as the utter disregard (applause) for the sanctity of human life.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : I have to say something. Can I please?
David Dimbleby : (unclear)
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interupting) Let me just say something because I think I feel so strongly about that . If it's wrong to demonize muslims it is equally wrong to demonize Americans (smattering of applause) and I think it has become a sport and we shouldn't allow this pain to, to, to sanction that kind of behavior. I think we all have to be reflective
David Dimbleby : (interrupting) Are you saying… Are you saying it's not then a, a, a failure of American foreign policy…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : It is. It is.
David Dimbleby : …that's led to this kind of action?
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : It is both sides. It is absolutely right for Americans to look at why they are despised and look at themselves but it is also very important for muslims and others who too easily talk about "the Americans" as if you know there is this block thing that we are allowed to despise. That is wrong too.
David Dimbleby : I said I'd come to you, yes
—————–end part 2—————–
David Dimbleby : I said I'd come to the gentleman there
Audience Member #21 : It's very, very important that the events that took place on Tuesday result in America waking up to their policies in the Middle East. (light applause) Now, it's not saying that that justifies what took place – no one is saying that justifies it but America for God's sake wake up to what you are doing in the Middle East…
Audience Member #21 : and when you wake up then you will solve the problem and you will prevent what happened on Tuesday. And that's the only way really to do that.
David Dimbleby : Paddy Ashdown.
(shouts from audience)
Paddy Ashdown : Yeah Well, th-the truth is that I suppose it is a result of that and but lets just reflect, now I speak as somebody who has been pretty critical in the past about many aspects of American foreign policy but, um, the Americans have put themselves out front. They have arbitrated, tried to arbitrate peace, I don't say they've done everything properly and right in the Middle East. They have been…
(shouting from the audience)
Paddy Ashdown : hang on, hang on, hang on. They have been and I don't condone every action they've taken – nevertheless in the front line of seeking to negotiate peace in various areas not the least, for instance, in Bosnia. So of course they haven't been right all the time but let us accept that one of the reasons why they are in the front line for terrorists who do not believe in democracy, who do not believe in liberty, who want to overturn the rule of law is precisely because the United States has been in the front line of fighting in favor of those things…
Paddy Ashdown : and let's at least understand that. David, there is another point, there is another point I wish to make directly in relation to the gentlemen down here and I speak as someone fought in 4 terrorist campaigns – against terrorists – including one in my own country in Northern Ireland. I know one thing is absolutely certain if you play the terrorist's game by being provoked into overreaction you do not defeat terrorism you grow terrorism and that is why…
Paddy Ashdown : and that is why, and that is why at this stage what we have to do is act very carefully and very precisely. Look, here is the bottom line : there is no defense against the determined terrorist. There is no defense against the determined terrorist who will pay with – seeks, wishes to pay with his lives – the moment that person has left their terrorist camp armed with a will to die and the weapons of mass destruction stopping him is a matter, chiefly, of luck. There is only one way you can cope with this and that is that you make it under international law illegal for a nation to harbor or give succor to terrorists.
Paddy Ashdown : Now if out of this, if out of this comes a Geneva Convention which is against giving succor to terrorism, an international instrument. That is the way you squeeze this problem off and kill it at it's source and that's the action we have to take which is why this gentleman is right.
(audience is restless)
David Dimbleby : the gentlemen in the fourth row, you, yes you.
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : …mention that when President Bush talks about terrorist and those who harbor them did he and the American government consider that fact the world, uh, one of the reasons the world despises America because it sees Israel as a terrorist and America as one who harbors Israel as a terrorist. That should be considered. I'm talking about foreign policy again.
David Dimbleby : Phil Lader. Phil Lader would you like to answer that point.
Philip Lader : I- I have to share with you that I find it hurtful to me that one could suggest the majority of the world despised the United States. My parents were immigrants to the United States and I have to tell you that we have fought as a people and as a nation, as Paddy suggests, for the rule of law and I simply want to say that it saddens me how it's possible on this night within 48 hours that one because (applause) that one because of the intensity of feeling on policy issues can frankly abstract
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : If I can interrupt…
Philip Lader : May I?
David Dimbleby : Let him finish.
Philip Lader : …can abstract ourselves from the senseless human victimization and suffering that has occurred before us.
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : I just want to… I just want to point out that it's not true that we don't feel anything but I think everyone will admit that within hours of this, uh, catastrophe it was the American government that started talking about war, started talking about culprits (audience shouting) I'm sorry. If Americans, if the American government was so concerned about causalities I'm sorry the government made me think about these things because they brought it up on public TV.
David Dimbleby : Alright, the woman on your left 2 away.
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : But, I'm sorry, but there's 20 thousand, 30 thousand, 40 thousand casualties or more…
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : (interrupts) One million in Iraq…
David Dimbleby : Let her answer. Let her answer your question.
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : …buried under rubble who didn't realize this was going to happen. They were going to work. They were normal people
(shouts from the audience)
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : they didn't understand
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : 500 children in Iraq every month
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : Is it an eye for an eye? Does it
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : why is the American life worth more
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : it's makes it no better
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : George Bush is talking about war, like he said
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : what is this I'm taking a
Audience Member #22 (woman in headscarf) : Is an American life more worth than a
Audience Member #23 (woman in black shirt) : No life is worth this
David Dimbleby : Listen, there is no way, there … will you take the microphone away please there is no way that you can argue with each other with one microphone we can't hear what you're saying. People at home can't hear what you're saying. (applause) So we'll bring an end to it. And so I'll come to the gentleman here in the pale blue shirt. Yes sir.
Audience Member #24 (man in blue shirt) : Hi. Well I had a different comment to make but i…
David Dimbleby : (interrupting) Alright, well make it.
Audience Member #24 (man in blue shirt) : I want to make this comment that y'know what I fear is most of all is that people will start turning against each other christians, muslims it's happening in this room right now…
Audience Member #24 (man in blue shirt) : and that is what we have to fight. We can't fight terrorists with guns or bombs. We have to fight terrorism We have to fight it at its roots. We have to fight poverty, we have to fight racism, we have to fight what's going on in this room! That's what we have to fight! (applause)
David Dimbleby : Ok, and the man in red there. You sir. Yes, you sir.
Audience Member #25 (man in red sweater & glasses) : I think the trouble is, uh, we keep talking about the symptoms well I think the cause of all this is because the American all-mighty dollar keeps wanting to spread the American way to every single country.
Audience Member #25 (man in red sweater & glasses) : and that…
David Dimbleby : Leave that. What is the action you think the American government should take?
Audience Member #25 (man in red sweater & glasses) : It's got to talk. It's very easy to be Rambo, let's be Rambo go in, let's send in Bruce Willis and kill everybody. (Rambo was played by Sylvester Stallone. Bruce Willis is known for Moonlighting and the Die Hard movies. sigh. –ed.) It's absolutely ridiculous. You've got to talk! Find out what these people are really thinking!
David Dimbleby : Ok, the man behind. You sir.
Audience Member #26 (man in black shirt) : I mean, why are there warships in the Persian Gulf?
David Dimbleby : I said, say again? What?
Audience Member #26 (man in black shirt) : Why are there warships in the Persian Gulf… already. I thought innocent unprov- innocent until proven guilty.
David Dimbleby : and the man there on the right. You sir with your hand up. No, no, no this man here. In the white shirt, no? You yes you in the black tie.
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : well I think it's appalling that um … I think it's just appalling that you're all supporting terrorists and that I think none of you…
(applause and jeering)
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : hold on a minute, that none of you
David Dimbleby : I don't think you've been listening
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : No, no just one minute. none of us would be able to sit here and express our views as freely as we do if it wasn't for the sacrifices made by British and American servicemen…
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) and Indians and Africans
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : I think that's a very important point
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown : (interrupting) and Indians, Africans and muslims there all for it
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : We have values, the point I'm making is…
David Dimbleby : What, what do you want to see the American administration and the British government do at this point?
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : I don't think there is anyone in this room who would want a disproportionate response because that would bring us down to their level which is not what we want to do but that doesn't mean that we can negotiate as Tam Dalyell says. There's no negotiation with terrorists because… and some people ask what do these people really want? There's been a declaration of war by Osama Bin Laden and other people
(jeers and shouts from the audience)
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : against America . I'm sorry
(shouts from audience)
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : I'm sorry he did… hold on a second
David Dimbleby : hold on, let him … don't shout him down
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : hold on a second…
David Dimbleby : Don't shout him down. You had your say. Let (something unclear)
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : there is a conflict of values between our values which we should prize and defend if we have to which is freedom under the law – Paddy Ashdown was saying it – sanctity for human life and respect for other people and there are other people here in this room but go to many countries around the world like Iraq and so on where you can not express yourself freely
David Dimbleby : Alright
Audience Member #27 (man in black tie) : now we're defending that freedom
David Dimbleby : Alright, we have to stop. our time is up and my apologies to those of you who haven't been able to get in but my thanks to you for coming. My thanks to all the panel here. This ends this special edition of Question Time.
—————–end part 3—————–
btw, does anyone know which episode of Question Time had panelists and/or the audience declare that Anders Breivik and his ilk must be negotiated with, mention that Breivik's act of mass murder was a result of the Norwegian Labor Party policies and discuss why Norwegian teenagers are so despised and/or detested?


text:
by Ugh
Vox has an interview with "a 23-year veteran of the CIA and a former deputy officer on the National Intelligence Council." I picked this up in my twitter feed, that person describing it as "chilling." But I think they meant chilling from an "isn't Trump a horrible threat?" perspective, although perhaps not. But my take away is that the intelligence community - or at least this person who spent more than two decades working in it - is full of themselves (and "it") and feels entitled to undermine the President of the United States if they view him as sufficiently not to their liking.
More below.
What's happened is that the organs of government sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States have been trying to do their jobs. Intelligence professionals take their responsibilities seriously. Whatever they do, they do it because they believe it is necessary, because they believe duty demands it. They're not playing political games.
This is such chest-beating horsesh1t I can hardly believe it. Not the least of which he seems to think that only portions of the government swear this oath and take it seriously, but the idea that "intelligence professionals" only do things because they believe it necessary and duty demands is plainly laughable. As is the idea that they are not playing political games. John Brennan's spat with the Senate Intelligence Committee being a notable recent example of the opposite of this statement
We are facing the gravest threat to our institutions and our government since 1861, since the country broke in half. This is a graver crisis than Watergate, which was about corruption, not the usurpation of our laws and our checks and balances.
Holy crap is this nonsense. Watergate was much much more than merely simple corruption and was precisely about the "usurpation of our laws and checks and balances." Indeed, I don't see how the current crisis implicates checks and balances at all - other than the GOP-led congress has decided it's not going to act (at least so far). Indeed, he seems to think that the intelligence community is a check and balance against the President. That's... not correct.
And, on top of that, [Trump's] team appears to have been colluding with Russian intelligence services. This is a massive crisis for our norms and our Constitution, and we have to say so.
(emphasis in original) And yet this first statement contradicts what he said earlier in the interview, which was that "Trump and his entourage, for a long period of time, have been associating with, meeting with, involved with, or working somehow with Russian intelligence." Well which is it? He also claims to have "figure[d] this out" - but then immediately backtracks. I guess I would agree this is crisis for our norms.
These sorts of accusations [by Rep. Nunes that leaks are retaliation by the intelligence community] are outrageous and part of the problem. It's shocking to see such a betrayal of the oaths these people took to serve the nation.
This is him, and given his experience I would say at least some portion of the intelligence community, being the sole arbiter of what it means to "serve the nation." Apparently, in his and part of the IC's view, if they determine POTUS is not serving the nation then actively undermining him - via anonymous leaks of secret information - is fully justified. In fact necessary to save the nation and Constitution.
So no, we should not — and cannot — trust this man [Trump].
Again, this is not acceptable from the intelligence community w/r/t the President of the United States. If a large portion of the IC thinks POTUS is a clear and present danger to the United States, they can resign en masse, go to the press, and then dare the FBI and DOJ to arrest and prosecute them. To paraphrase something from twitter - it is rather ominous that our government is being yanked hither and yon by anonymous selective leaks of vague classified information.
I have publicly talked about the crisis that this circumstance poses to the national security establishment. What do you do if you think the officer in charge of you is the one who's betraying the oath and the obligations to protect the Constitution and the country?
If you resign, then someone else will take your place. If you report the information, it will be tabled or used against you rather than acted upon. If you go in-house, you risk having the information passed up the chain of command. So if I were put in this dilemma, I would do what I thought was necessary to protect the nation's secrets.
Leaks are the only option that one has in this existential crisis to protect the Constitution.
I do have sympathy for the lack of whistle-blower avenues and subsequent protection, but this is rather rich coming from the IC. Notably he doesn't mention going to Congress (Sen. Feinstein anyone? Or McCain, at least on Russia issues). Notably he thinks resignation merely means you will be replaced. Most important: he speaks of a crisis for "the national security establishment," and with that he inadvertently gives away the game ISTM - Trump is a threat to the national security apparatus. So of course the interviewee thinks leaks in these circumstances are just fine, but did he have that view under Obama? Or perhaps more to the point, under Bush when the CIA was happily torturing people in secret prisons around the world and then stuffing them in Gitmo under orders from the President and legal cover from the DOJ? Where was this kind of view then? Or perhaps torture and secret prisons were "necessary" and "duty demand[ed] it." Chilling, indeed.
Maybe Trump is sui generis and thus this is a one-off thing for the intelligence community, but I have serious doubts about that (e.g., why wasn't this all coming out during the campaign in such an explicit manner, or did the IC - which in my mind includes the FBI - think Trump would be great for them and when it turns out it's the exact opposite they're having buyer's remorse?).

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Le Weekend
Vivian and Chris, from work, and I had our weekly power lunch (hahahaha) at Schiller's on Friday. It's a very good opportunity for bitching, bonding and blowing off steam. Sometimes we even solve problems. See how possessively Chris is holding his Stella. Someone may take it away...
A martini in the middle of the workday you ask (actually, it depends who you are. Some of you - like one of the six people who read this blog [an elite group, though, yes?]! - may ask, what, only one?). Yes, I wanted a martini. It was happy, celebratory martini. It's a nice word, which is why I repeat it...It was a very, very good martini, shaken by the cute bartender with the dreads. He said it was shaken with love... yeah, right. Grey Goose, no vermouth, and the olives. It was shaken so that not too much ice got into the drink. Really, it was one of the best I've had. I can't do gin martinis anymore. They burn my mouth and they smell a little like my Chanel No. 19, which is disconcerting. My father still does the gin version, very proper and old-school. For a man who drinks very little, he has been known to order a couple at The Cellars for Sunday lunch. It is a beautiful, evocative, romance-laden drink, a throwback from another time.
The sizzling shrimp. It's a very small cast iron dish that is put in front of you, bubbling furiously, and dangerously hot. In it are medium size shrimp, molten olive oil, thinly sliced garlic, hot chile flakes and lemon. It's fantastic. With some bread, it's perfect. I have favourite things to eat everywhere: the lemon chicken on fennel salad at my favourite, best-loved restaurant, Al di La; the chicken liver and foie gras mousse with bitter frisee at Balthazar; the Croque Madame at Robin des Bois; the burger at Prune; the rabbit and noodles at Lucien...I better stop. And this shrimp. It's so simple.
And on to Saturday morning and a late breakfast on the terrace under a blessing of cool blue sky. I've just started Susanna Clarke's Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell for the second time, after reading it in 2004. I'm looking forward to getting into it again: magic, secret pathways, old England, the Raven King. It's very well written. I took it out because I was going to lend it to Mimi, but then I made the mistake of opening it, so maybe I'll have to buy one for her.
And this for Vince:
My free-seeded grass and the purple basil. Signs of the season. What will it look like in a month? In a month...I have always wanted to look forward to September. From the inside, I mean, not just because of feeling the relief of the outside: lovely weather and clear edges. It is the month of remembering, and wanting, and thinking you hear voices and music but not sure whose or where. Possibly from dreams. The one who lives there and occasionally shows himself, but isn't recognized in any of the ones in the waking world.
Posted by Marie at 8:03:00 PM
Labels: 66 Square Feet: the terrace, New York
5 comments:
- AnonymousAugust 19, 2007 at 2:42 AM
Then September shall be a month to remember forever! The sleeper must awaken. :-)ReplyDelete
Let it be known that Marie basically posed me for that photo with the "huge, manly beer". Now if I had gotten a Grey Goose martini, as madam red did, I would have been gripping that whole-heartedly! :-)ReplyDelete
Don't accuse me of not gripping my martini!ReplyDelete
Oh, you're not. Sorry. Edgy.ReplyDelete
Comments on posts older than 48 hours are moderated (for spam control) . Yours will be seen! Unless you are a troll. Serial trollers are banned.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
New publications
2011 National Assessment Program in ICT (NAP – ICT) Literacy Report
DEEWR, July 2012
The 2011 National Assessment Program in ICT (NAP – ICT) Literacy Report provides a comprehensive picture of how Australian students are performing in the digital age. NAP – ICT Literacy Assessment commenced in 2005 and samples of year 6 and year 10 students participate in this assessment. Teachers, schools and governments can now compare the progress of student results from ICT tests which year 6 and year 10 students took in 2005, 2008 and 2011. Students undertaking the NAP – ICT Literacy Assessment are tested on their ability to appropriately access, manage, integrate and evaluate information, develop new understandings and communicate with others in order to participate effectively in society. The report evaluates the assessment that took place in 649 Australian schools in 2011 and compares samples of how more than 5,700 year 6 and 5,300 year 10 students are performing. Among year 6 students there has been considerable improvement since 2005, with the percentage of year 6 students attaining the Proficient Standard increasing from 49 per cent in 2005 to 62 per cent in 2011. Among year 10 students there was no significant improvement, with 65 per cent of year 10 students in 2011 reaching or exceeding the year 10 Proficient Standard compared to 61 per cent in 2005. Adapted from DEEWR statement, linked to the full report online.
Subject HeadingsTechnological literacy
Information and Communications Technology (ICT)
Educational evaluation
Youth Connections Subjective Wellbeing Report
DEEWR, April 2012
The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) in partnership with RMIT University has conducted a longitudinal study investigating the subjective wellbeing of young people participating in the National Partnerships Youth Connections Program. The report presents findings from the second wave of data collected between March 2011 and January 2012. Adapted from Executive Summary. The report is available online. See also comment 11 July from the Australian Minister for School Education, Peter Garrett.
Subject HeadingsAdolescents
Young adults
Delivering School Transparency in Australia: National Reporting through My School
OECD, June 2012
This case study describes the policy-making process in Australia leading to the public release of information on every school in Australia through the My School website. Policy lessons are described to provide insight for OECD member countries which may be grappling with similar issues in developing school accountability systems, particularly those working within federal-state contexts. While some of the lessons from this policy development and implementation process relate specifically to Australia's circumstances, there are general policy prescriptions of broader interest to other countries seeking to improve school education through measurement and reporting of key factors of school operations and performance. From publisher's description. The full report may be purchased online. See also statement from Australian Minister for School Education, Peter Garrett, 28 June 2012.
Subject HeadingsReporting
Educational evaluation
Educational accountability
Education policy
Devolution and Education
Australian Education Union, May 2012
Devolution in the context of education goes under many names. They include school/site-based decision making/management; school/site-based autonomy; self-managing schools; autonomy for local schools; and decentralised/site-based management. Essentially devolution concerns the distribution of power and funding between governments and schools and structural changes in the governance, management and financing of schools. Internationally there are significant differences in how it operates but there is general consensus among advocates of such initiatives that they will improve school effectiveness and student learning outcomes by producing better educational decision-making; improving school management and leadership; improving quality of teaching; leading to a more responsive curriculum; and producing more efficient use of resources. However, there is no evidence that devolution in its myriad forms has in itself led to improved student achievement. Adapted from report, which is available online.
Subject HeadingsEducational innovations
Educational planning
Educational administration
Indigenous Education 2012
The Centre for Independent Studies, June 2012
Indigenous Education 2012 examines 'the real reasons why government education policies are failing' in Indigenous and mainstream schools. The report critiques the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on programs 'that are not only unsuccessful but also take time and attention away from the classroom teaching essential for literacy and numeracy'. The authors suggest that principals need greater autonomy over staffing and budgets, including the option to refuse counterproductive programs and instead receive equivalent funds for improved classroom teaching. The report also examines Indigenous participation in vocational and university education, and 'government's creation of counterfeit jobs to soak up the Indigenous students who finish school illiterate and innumerate'. From publisher's description. The full report is available online. See also comment 3 July on The Conversation website, and article 27 June 2012 in The West Australian.
Subject HeadingsEducational planning
Educational evaluation
Aboriginal students
Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching
A comprehensive system should address these purposes in a coherent way and provide support for supervision and professional learning, identify teachers who need additional assistance and – in some cases – a change of career, and recognise expert teachers who can contribute to the learning of their peers. This report outlines an integrated approach that connects these goals to a teaching-career continuum and a professional development system that supports effectiveness for all teachers at every stage of their careers. From Executive summary. The full report is available online.
Subject HeadingsProfessional development
Teaching and learning
Teacher evaluation
United States of America (USA)
Getting in Sync: Revamping Licensing and Preparation for Teachers in Pre-K, Kindergarten, and the Early Grades
New America Foundation, March 2011
The New America Foundation examines the state of preparation programs for public school teachers who work with children in pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, first, second, and third grades. Our analysis shows that preparation, licensure and hiring systems are not currently designed to produce and place teachers in these classrooms who are equipped to ensure that children get a strong foundation of knowledge and skills that will help them succeed in school and in life. From report, which is available online.
Subject HeadingsEarly childhood education
Primary education
Teacher training
Educational evaluation
United States of America (USA)


text:
If Daniel isn't one of our favorite prophets, he should be. In fourteen action-packed chapters, you have unforgettable narratives: three young men dancing in a blast furnace, the handwriting on the wall, fierce animals (lions and a dragon), the sweep of Hellenistic history, and the incomparable Susanna defended from the death penalty in an inspired courtroom scene.
Daniel doesn't appear often in the Lectionary. Short shrift for one of the "major" prophets. We get him twice this year (cycle B) on the last two weeks of ordinary time. As you settle into your pews on November 17th/18th this year, you'll hear this conclusion of a longish apocalyptic narrative (Daniel 10 through 12):
I, Daniel, mourned and I heard this word of the Lord:
"At that time there shall arise
Michael, the great prince,
guardian of your people;
It shall be a time unsurpassed in distress
since nations began until that time.
At that time your people shall escape,
everyone who is found written in the book.
Many of those who sleep
in the dust of the earth shall awake;
some shall live forever,
others shall be an everlasting horror and disgrace.
But the wise shall shine brightly
like the splendor of the firmament,
And those who lead the many to justice
shall be like the stars forever.
Believers will suffer persecution. They will also experience some of their numbers abandoning the faith. For the first readers of Daniel, this meant the Jewish people. Christians would certainly interpret God's agency in human history as something applicable to them. So these verses from the prophet apply to them as well.
When would this passage be an appropriate choice? Certainly for a believer who has gone through a period of tribulation. It is a hopeful message for a loyal Christian. I would think the punishment overtones would be a bit much for someone whose faithfulness is in some doubt. "Horror and disgrace" are not matters one wants to think about when deep in grief. And while we know the stars themselves are not eternal, we get the message: those who have remained faithful to God will not go wanting after they awake from the dust of the earth.
Your thoughts about this reading? I don't think it's chosen much.


text:
Exercise and Mobility: Staying Active as You Age
For many Americans exercise is a four-letter word. If you have been told by your doctor that you should increase your level of physical activity, today is the perfect day to start. There are so many good reasons to add exercise to your life. Did you know that exercise and physical activity can help to manage diseases like diabetes, heart disease and osteoporosis?
Regular exercise can help you maintain or improve your physical strength, fitness, balance, and make it easier to do all the things you enjoy each day. Physical activity can reduce feelings of depression and improve overall mood and sense of well-being. With regular exercise, you may even find it easier to shift between tasks, plan activities and be able to sort relevant information from irrelevant information.
It's no secret that exercise is good for you. We can all afford to do a little more of it. The question is often where to start and how to get motivated. You can get started by setting goals. Realistic and specific goals can make it easier to get started with a regular exercise plan. Start small. I'm going to buy new walking shoes. I'm going to walk for 15 minutes three days this week. Build up to the bigger challenges. I'm going to walk a mile every day. The more you exercise, the more you'll want to. Grab a friend and together you can work towards improving your health and well-being through regular exercise.
Wondering what kind of exercise to do? There are four main categories of exercise – Endurance, Strength, Balance, and Flexibility. Let's take a look at each one and some of the activities that fall within each category.
- Endurance. Endurance exercises are designed to increase your heart rate. Endurance or aerobic exercise will improve your overall fitness with a focus on keeping your heart, lungs and circulatory system healthy. If you have diabetes or heart disease, you may want to discuss starting endurance exercises with your doctor. Endurance exercises work to mitigate the effects of chronic diseases. Examples of endurance exercises include brisk walking or jogging, dancing, swimming, biking, and playing tennis.
- Strength. Strength exercises will make your muscles stronger. Stronger muscles make it easier to stay independent and take part in the daily activities you enjoy. Strength exercises are also commonly called strength training or resistance training. Examples of strength exercises include lifting weights and using resistance bands.
- Balance. Balance exercises are essential for preventing falls. Balance exercises are important for aging individuals who are often injured during falls. Balance exercises are easy to perform and can be done in the comfort of your home, often without any additional equipment. Examples of balance exercises included standing on one foot, heel to toe walking, and Tai Chi.
- Flexibility. Flexibility exercises stretch your muscles and keep your body limber. With added flexibility it is often easier to do simple things like bending to tie your shoes or picking up items that have fallen on the floor. Shoulder and arm stretches, calf stretches and yoga are examples of flexibility exercises.
As we age, exercise becomes even more important; staying active helps us to stay healthy. "It is so important to keep moving and to stay active. Elderly individuals who maintain an active lifestyle are often healthier and happier," says Larry Meigs, President and CEO of Visiting Angels.
Whenever you decide to start an exercise program, it is important that you consult with your health care provider. Your doctor can help you determine what kinds of activities are safe and recommended for your current level of health and physical activity. If you begin exercising and experience any difficulties, including dizziness, chest pain or pressure, sores that won't heal, joint swelling, or feeling that your heart is skipping or racing, please contact your doctor immediately.
* This information is for informational purposes only.


text:
2008 Detroit Auto Show: Exciting Chinese-Designed Buick Riviera Concept Showcased at Detroit Auto Show - MUCHO VIDEO
DETROIT – The Buick Riviera, a stunning concept car designed to showcase Buick's new global design direction, makes its North American debut at the Buick stand during the North American International Auto Show.
"We said last year the Riviera concept made us realize how small the world was – it's not East; it's not West. It's Buick," said Ed Welburn, vice president, GM Global Design. "The reaction to the car around the globe proved that to be very much the case."Click PLAY button to watch the introduction of the Buick Riviera concept at Auto Shanghai '07.
Engineered to accommodate a new hybrid system that will go into production this year at Shanghai GM (SGM), GM's flagship joint venture with SAIC, the Riviera features several technological and manufacturing advances. They represent the latest achievements of GM and its partners in the promotion and development of alternative propulsion technologies in China.
"The Riviera concept underscores the diversity, strength and depth of the GM global design and engineering network," said Welburn. "It also reflects PATAC's growing role within the GM Design family and China's significance as the world's largest Buick market."
The Riviera marks the return of a renowned Buick nameplate after an eight-year hiatus. Between 1963 and 1999, GM sold more than 1.1 million Rivieras in the United States.Click PLAY button to watch a short video clip with Bob Lutz describing the design of the Buick Riviera concept.
"The Riviera concept, with its tightly stretched carbon fiber body panels, combination of positive and negative curves, strong front and rear identities and gull-wing doors, captures the essence of Buick classics, while presenting a thoroughly 21st century design," said Welburn. "It certainly lives up to the nameplate's reputation for bold design. The Riviera communicates the global design vocabulary of the Buick brand and sets the stage for General Motors' design, engineering and manufacturing centers to work together on the next generation of Buick midsize luxury cars."
A sense of existence
To establish their design direction, PATAC designers looked, in part, to Buick icons such as the original Y-Job concept of 1938, the 1960s LeSabre, Electra 225, and the Riviera coupes, of the 1960s and '70s.
The Riviera design is structured around the Buick tri-shield logo, sitting proudly on a trihedral waterfall grille that is formed by three intersecting planes. This takes the traditional Buick treatment to a new level of sophisticated boldness.
The Buick logo leads into a reflective strip through the hood, a mark of respect to the distinctive mid-hood crease prevalent in classic Buicks. Elongated LED headlamps flow up the hood sides to three-section, top-mounted chrome portholes as a single piece of jewelry.
The logo, hood strip, headlamps, side mirrors and rocker covers all have "icy green" backlighting available at night, matched by backlit logo and exhausts at the rear. Designers incorporated several other design signatures from the original Riviera generation, including the "double-sweep spear" line along the body side and a flared tail design.
In this theme, the Shell Blue exterior color was chosen to elicit the right level of attention. The color is metallic silver with light blue accents that highlight the coupe's exterior curves. The gull-wing doors, selected for their exotic appeal, achieve an expansive entrance to the 2+2 seating configuration. Measuring 1,938 mm at their widest point, the doors add to the coupe's sleek sideline. At night, the fully opened doors gently cast the "Buick" name on the ground.
The use of carbon fiber in all body panels allowed designers greater flexibility through reduced mass and added strength. This made the gull-wing engineering demands easier to realize and sharp, tight radius curves possible across the body surface. The side mirrors are sweeping yet unobtrusive, taking a cue from Formula One racecars, and the Riviera sits on 21-inch, 10-spoke forged aluminum wheels that combine polished and satin finishes with low-profile tires.
PATAC designed the Buick Riviera to accommodate the new hybrid system, which will be introduced in China in 2008 this year prior to the Beijing Olympics. The new hybrid system fits naturally with the Riviera's "earth and water" design theme.Click PLAY button to watch a short video clip with Bob Lutz talking about General Motors' "China Strategy."
All about relaxation
The Riviera's interior can be summed up with one word: sanctuary. The use of rich blue and subtle creams, representing water and earth, is conveyed in the high-quality leather bucket seats, plush carpet and a luxurious, padded steering wheel. Completing the organic feel, the roof comprises two shaded glass windows offering increased headroom and a celestial connection for occupants.
Designers aimed to have the driver feel relaxed and tranquil inside the car. Earth and water tones were used, and hard, aggressive edges were studiously avoided.
The interior has no discernable start and finish point for the front and sides, creating a comfortable lounge feel. It is immediately futuristic yet somehow familiar. A three-dimensional speedometer, inspired by past classics but utterly modern in design, compliments the touchpad styled central console loosely modeled on a computer mouse. An LCD display screen crowns the central console.
Riviera's interior designers were encouraged to consider people's personal belongings to enhance their feeling of familiarity and comfort in the vehicle. Continuing the theme of calm simplicity, electronic shifter pads replace the traditional transmission shifter and controls are kept to a minimum to deter driver distraction.
Ambient light strips are applied across the console and inserted on the door liner, stretching to the front seats. Deliberately imitating precious Chinese jade stone, the lights are tinted a subtle icy green, which also offers tribute to a favored color of historical Buicks of days gone by.
Interior trim treatments befitting the Buick prestige abound: miniature aluminum tri-shields in the front seat headrests; a wooden floor mat in the rear; and a rear central armrest which can move sideways left and right to accommodate passengers of different sizes.
Royal blue Alcantara, a plush, suede-like covering, was chosen for the door, console and roof, while sandy white leather covers the lower door, lower console and seats.
Ancient influences in modern design
The design team set out to create a modern global design. At the same time, they sought to draw from their heritage outside the automotive industry from classic shapes, concepts and artifacts. They wanted to include a subtle Chinese essence and influence if one looked deeply enough.
A strong influence was the yuanbao, a small curvaceous gold or silver ingot used in ancient China as currency and popular today as a symbol of ancient Chinese prosperity.
PATAC designers intended the design convey East and West coexisting in harmony. The design brief was global, taking a portion of Buick's DNA and creating something for the world. The North American debut of the Buick Riviera concept highlighted the achievement of that goal.


text:
Welch Daily News
Welch Honors Memory Of 21 Dead Soldiers
Impressive Service Held Here Sunday
Flag-Draped Caskets Line Station Platform
July 6, 1942
Welch Honors Memory Of 21 Dead Soldiers
Impressive Service Held Here Sunday
Flag-Draped Caskets Line Station Platform
A salute was fired.
Taps were sounded.
And thus ended Welch's special tribute Sunday evening to 21 United States Army men who died Wednesday in an airplane crash at Premier. Scene of the service, first of its kind in the history of McDowell county, was the local Norfolk and Western Railway station.
War's stark realities of death and destruction were brought closer home to the hundreds of onlookers who came to pay homage to the dead soldiers just before they were to be sent to their homes by train.
Scheduled to begin at 6 o'clock crowds began filling the roped-off section of the station by 5:30. Surrounding lawns of the World War Memorial building and McDowell county court house were filled to capacity fifteen minutes before the service began.
No relatives of the dead were among the hundreds of spectators. But there were scores of mothers, fathers, sisters, wives, sweethearts and friends of youths now serving their country. Women wept softly - some perhaps with thoughts of their own in combat service. Hope and determination could be found in the words of the principal speaker, the Rev. D. M. Dorsey, himself a veteran of the first World War.
"They did not die in vain," he told his listeners whose eyes remained fixed on the flag-draped boxes containing the caskets and bodies of the plane victims. Beneath each flag was a single wreath contributed by the local Salvation Army corps. Nearby at attention stood the 21 escorts who were to accompany their buddies to their homes in 14 different states. All bodies were sent to their destination on Sunday.
"We are gathered here," the Rev. Mr. Dorsey began, "as one people under one flag and one Lord. We don't know the church affiliations of these men, but we do know they are Americans. They gave their lives in their line of duty although not on the battle front.
"They died a tragic death, but they did not die in vain," he went on. "This service may soon be forgotten but the spirit of those soldiers will live on in all of those assembled here today...Let us pledge of allegiance again to God and this country that these heroes of many different states have not died in vain."
The service opened with members of the local company of the West Virginia Home Guard under the command of Capt. John A. Blevins, marching to the station platform. Scripture reading was by Capt. F. M. Gaugh of the local Salvation Army corps. This was followed by a prayer by the Rev. W. C. Brown, pastor of the First Presbyterian church.
Roll call of the dead was read by R. E. L. Douglas of McDowell Post No. 8, of the American Legion, after which the Rev. Mr. Dorsey delivered his brief sermon. This was followed by the Rev. A. A. Duke of the Church of God, leading the crowd in singing America. Benedi[c]tion was by the Rev. G. K. Patty of the First Methodist church.
The home guard fired three times in salute to the dead, then taps were sounded by Danny Dorsey, bugler.
Following are the plane victims and escorts who left Welch by train late Sunday night:
Pvt. Edward F. X. Carr, Philadelphia, Pa., escort, Corp. N. H. Langford.
Corp. Claudius W. Haywood, Ambler, Pa., escort, Sgt. W. L. Ohda.
Pvt. Chester F. Petrowski, Auburn, N. Y., escort, Pfc. J. F. Kennedy.
Staff Sg. Leo T. Colburn, Tuscaloosa, Ala., escort, Staff Sergeant J. L. Smith.
Pvt. Elmer J. Campbell, Stanley, Va., escort, Corp. J. I. Lesher.
Pfc. Denver W. Koeppe, Bryan, O., escort, Pfc. R. J. Mallett.
Staff Sgt. Anthony W. Belcher, Ironton, O., escort, Staff Sgt. W. W. Smith.
2nd Lt. Walter R. Faught, Jr., Paris, Tex., escort, Lt. A. L. Coenen.
2nd Lt. Edwin A. Harness, La Porte, Ind., escort, 2nd Lt. J. G. Flautt.
Staff Sgt. Archie W. Chamblin, Leavenworth, Kans., escort, Staff Sgt. V. S. Margners.
Staff Sgt. Russell A. Carter, Topeka, Kans., escort, Staff Sgt. D. M. Wayne.
Staff Sgt. Salvatore T. Barone, Mt. Morris, N. Y., escort, Staff Sgt. J. A. Wallace.
Staff Sgt. Joseph S. Cholewa, Racine, Wis., escort, Staff Sgt. W. A. Thomas.
Pfc. Lester S. Erickson, Superior, Wis., escort, Corp. G. H. McCubbin.
Pvt. Elmo G. Edmunds, Quincy, Ill., escort, Sgt. R. C. Calybough.
Staff Sgt. Leon A. Olin, Big Timber, Mont., escort, Staff Sgt. J. P. Morgan.
Staff Sgt. Horace M. Dickson, Hannibal, Mo., escort, Staff Sgt. L. W. Kaffenberger.
Corp. Bartola P. Purpura, Watertown, N. Y., escort, Sgt. W. L. Ambos.
Corp. Kermit S. Masters, Sheldon, Mo., escort, Corp. C. R. Harris.
Staff Sgt. George R. Eversull, Stuart, Iowa, escort, Staff Sgt. F. P. Greer.


text:
For Live Assistance Call
Estimated production and handling times vary and are indicated individually on each item's page. All online orders are shipped with Canada Post priority mail unless otherwise arranged. Shipping transit times to Canada and the USA is around 3-6 business days depending on the location. Upon receiving successful payment for a product, we will provide an estimated delivery date for the product to be shipped via email.
Our online return policy is 7 days after the item is received. Customers must contact us for an RA number before returning an item. You can message us or call the store to obtain an RA number. To return an item, it must be in the exact same, brand new condition you received it in. We will inspect all items and determine if they are eligible for return once we receive them.Watches: Watches must be returned in perfect packaging and condition, along with all the documents and the warranty card. Any missing components will void returnability of the watch. Jewellery and other merchandise: Items that are purchased from in-stock inventory may be returned for a refund if you are not satisfied. Contact Graziella Fine Jewellery first for specific return instructions prior to shipping. Special orders and custom orders are not refundable. Online store order cannot be returned to the store. They must be shipped back and a refund will be credited to the original online payment method. We do not accept returns after 7 days from the day the product is received date.
Note that IN-STORE return policies are different from ONLINE store purchases. Visit a Graziella location for more IN STORE policy details. Merchandise that is sized, shortened or altered in any way is not refundable.
Graziella Fine Jewellery only accepts Visa and Master Card as methods of payments online.
Enter your information below and tell us about your experience.
Check out with Sezzle and split your entire order into 4 interest-free payments over 6 weeks.


text:
French Fridays with Dorie: Nutella TartineFebruary 10, 2012 at 6:53 pm | Posted in breakfast things, french fridays w dorie, groups, other sweet, sweet things | 14 Comments
Tags: breakfast, snacks
It was hard for me not to make this week's FFWD recipe. It's toast– heck, I can make time for that! Toast with yummy stuff on top, that is. This tartine is a thick slice of brioche with butter, marmalade, Nutella, nuts and salt. You could buy everything and simply assemble it, but I happened to have a couple of the components in homemade form (but already on hand). I still had some homemade brioche in the freezer, and over the holidays, my BFF and I made a big pot of mixed-citrus marmalade to give to family. A bit of sweet, a bit of sour and a bit of salt…this is toast at its finest. Dorie says this is a typical after-school snack for French children, but I ate mine for breakfast. Then I went to the dentist and he found no cavities. Breakfast of champions.
For the recipe, see Around my French Table by Dorie Greenspan. Don't forget to check out my fellow francophiles' posts.
14 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Fun breakfast! Lovely photo.
Comment by confessionsofaculinarydiva— February 11, 2012 #
I can't believe I didn't make this one – my kids would have devoured it! OK, I would have devoured it too. On my to-do list. Yours looks beautiful.
Comment by Jessica @ cookbookhabit— February 12, 2012 #
Leave a Reply
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.


text:
It wasn't that long ago that driving west on Route 110 from Chelmsford Center soon became a bucolic ride through the town of Westford, which ended for many with an ice cream at Kimball Farm.
Back then, there wasn't much to divert your attention as you covered the length of Littleton Road, unless you were on your way to Nashoba Valley Ski Area.
How that has all changed. High-tech companies and shopping plazas soon sprang up along and near Route 110, giving town residents the added convenience and a deeper tax base, which was offfset by an influx of traffic.
The epicenter of Westford's commercial growth was centered around Minot's Corner, at the confluence of Route 110, Boston Road and Carlisle Road, just off Interstate 495.
Snarling traffic had just become a way of life for motorists who made their way daily through that gauntlet. It was the price of prosperity, one that had to be endured if it couldn't be cured.
However, the addition of Cornerstone Square, which contains 238,000 square feet of retail and office space, and car dealership Boch Honda West, appeared to help launch roadway improvements from the drawing board to the asphalt.
And that's what town officials and area politicians celebrated Tuesday, with a ceremonial groundbreaking to launch the multifacted project.
The combination of additional lanes on all three roadways, plus turning lanes, should answer the prayers — or oaths — of motorists stuck in those interminable traffic jams.
The $4.7 million project won't happen overnight — it's projected to be complete by the late fall of 2015. But even with all the added inconvenience this undertaking will cause, for all those who agreed this was "a long time coming," it will be well worth the wait.


text:
- Inside Athletics
- Tickets
- Fan Zone
- Media Zone
- Social
- Shop
- Donate Now
Buccaneers' stay at the Championship also comes to an end
EUGENE, Ore. (June 8, 2013) – ETSU senior Jason Johnson (Philadelphia, Pa.) tallied a 19th-place mark of 15.44 meters in the men's triple jump on Saturday afternoon on the Buccaneers' final day at the NCAA Division I 2013 Outdoor Track & Field Championship at Hayward Field in Eugene, Ore.
Johnson, who was seeded third in the second of two flights, achieved his 15.44m mark on his first jump. The Philadelphia native was unable to improve his score in his subsequent two jumps in which he committed fouls on both. The one posted score slated Johnson 19th overall in a field that was 24 deep.
"Jason's performance today was consistent with his performances all season," said ETSU Director of Track & Field/Cross Country George Watts. "He was close to his school record so I feel he was somewhat competitive today."
Though he was unable to reach his personal best mark of 15.48m to hopefully advance to the final, the veteran ultimately ended his ETSU days in style. Leading up to the NCAAs, he was able to accomplish many things this outdoor season to highlight his collegiate career. Notably, Johnson medaled silver at the Atlantic Sun Outdoor Championship in May with his personal and school record 15.48m leap, and gained Second Team All-Conference honors in the event. Largely not expected to advance to the NCAA Championship, the senior prolonged his final ETSU season with 15.40m ninth-place finish at the NCAA East Region Preliminaries two weeks ago to get to this stage.
"Jason needed a big personal best to advance to the final and I applaud him for his work ethic and desire to get better," said Watts. "I doubt many people gave him a shot to qualify for the NCAA Championship. He definitely exceeded expectations."
With Johnson's exit today from the NCAA Championship, the Bucs end their stay in Eugene. Advancing six student-athletes to this point is a major development for the ETSU track & field program and is hopefully a sign of things to come in the future.
"I feel that all six student-athletes handled the pressures of their first NCAA experience well," said Watts. "We have a goal of qualifying twice as many next year and to get on the scoreboard. Additionally, we set 12 to 13 school records this season and I believe we have raised the bar to new heights for ETSU track & field."
ETSU fans wanting to receive Buccaneer news, score updates, in-game promotions and much more sent to their mobile device can do so by signing up for "Buc Updates." Click here to sign up today!


text:
Ridley Scott insists he is not a nostalgic person, but you wouldn't know that looking at the 2017 movie calendar. Not only are audiences getting another "Alien" movie, "Alien: Covenant," on May 19, but also a long-time-coming "Blade Runner" sequel in October.
Scott made his name in Hollywood with "Alien" in 1979. It was the kind of genre-busting horror that continues to inspire pale imitations to this day. (Including one this year's Jake Gyllenhaal and Ryan Reynolds space pic "Life.") And then, in 1982, his futuristic neo-noir "Blade Runner" gave a new aesthetic to our dystopian future. It may have confounded most upon its release, but the sublime mind-bender has gained a cult and eventually popular following over the years.
While the titles might suggest otherwise, Scott says he's more interested in "what's next."
"I never look back," Scott said recently by phone. "I only look forward and think I'm very lucky to be able to do that."
In fact, he's so focused on what's next that even while talking big ideas about creation and "Alien: Covenant," Scott was doodling an image for scene 103 of his upcoming John Paul Getty kidnapping film, "All the Money in the World."
"I can do very good telephone doodles and they actually turn out as storyboards," Scott said matter-of-factly. "I'm storyboarding as we speak. I'm able to do that. It's all in my mind. I think I've got a kind of photographic memory. I was born with it. You either have it or you don't. So that's been quite useful."
"Alien: Covenant" is intended to be a sort of bridge between Scott's original "Alien" and the 2012 prequel "Prometheus." Scott has wanted to explore the origins of how that creature breathing down Ripley's neck came to be and ask the question that "Alien" didn't: Why would anyone make such a monster?
U.S. & World
The question is brought up in "Prometheus," technically the fifth film in the "Alien" universe, but most people who saw the 2012 prequel left feeling deeply confused. Scott is well-aware of this and promises there will be some clarity in "Covenant."
"'Prometheus' leaves us with a lot of questions and 'Covenant' answers a lot of those questions," he said.
"Alien: Covenant" brings in a new team, the crew of a colony ship, including Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup and Danny McBride, who believe they've found a paradise. Of course that turns out not to be the case.
Michael Fassbender's "Lawrence of Arabia"-loving android David is back too, as is a new android, Walter, also played by Fassbender, and the monster itself.
"We found out that the good old beast was still very popular with the audience, so I decided to reinject some of his presence back into it," Scott said. "It gets pretty gnarly. I'm very pleased with it actually."
Scott says audiences can expect some philosophizing and spectacular visuals, including an idea he came up with to solve the problem of how the ship would continue getting and storing power in deep space: Massive sails, about the size of six football fields that can soak up the radiance in space and store it as power.
"I discovered recently that's exactly what NASA are doing," Scott said. "You can make a fabric that is stronger than metal and you can fold it up into a massive box and it will fold away like a good sail on a sailing ship so I apply that kind of thinking and there we have it. It works. And then you get it in the hands of the visual effects people and it all looks pretty good. So we're going to send it to NASA to see if I can speed up the process for them."
That the film is being promoted as an "Alien" film rather than a "Prometheus" sequel is confounding to some, including Forbes' box office writer Scott Mendelson, who points out that "Prometheus" was rather successful. It made over $400 million worldwide against a $130 million budget.
"They're selling its relationship to a franchise that is well-known but isn't insanely beloved. It's a geek franchise," Mendelson said.
Mendelson added that while nostalgia might sell for some, it's not going to bring in a younger audience with its hard R rating.
Still, Scott has ideas for at least a few more "Alien" installments.
"In answering the question 'who, why and when was this thing made and for what reason,' it presents a whole different universe, so the universe starts expanding, which I think is healthy. Why switch it off?" Scott said. "What it's leading to is the question of creation. And creation, I don't care who you are, is on everyone's mind."
Whether or not audiences will see that expanded universe will depend on how well "Covenant" does. Closer on the horizon is "Blade Runner 2049," which is set 30 years after the original. Scott helped the screenplay and produce, but ceded directing responsibilities over to "Arrival" helmer Denis Villeneuve.
And while Scott might not consider himself nostalgic, he is at least a little excited about one crossover moment: The second "Blade Runner 2049" trailer is supposed to play in front of "Alien: Covenant" showings, which, Scott says drolly, "will be cool."