DESIGNER OF THE YEAR AWARDS:; ITN Design Museum: BV Visitor looking at display of Apple computers MS Line of different coloured Apple computers CMS Apple logo ZOOM IN Jonathan Ive (Winner, Designer of the Year) interview SOT - 10 years ago when I left people not interested in design/ this award recognises that design is understood as paying contribution to environment and way we interact with spaces CMS Logo on Apple computer TRACK past Apple items on display FADE TO... CMS iPod TILT DOWN Clean feed tape = D0516063 or D0516064 00.35.37 to 00.39.35 MIX/FX Programme as broadcast tape = D0516062 Order Ref: T02060319

Sound Bite: Robert Downey Jr. I’ve had a production company and I’m gonna have another one. This was my buddy Dido who is just such a character who’s just such a character wrote this book that you could say was a boo, it was a serious of vignettes. My buddy Jonathan Elias who really is the guy who nobody, you know often times in movie the person who really sparked the idea is never mentioned at the junket. Jonathan Elias, Jonathan Elias. I said were going to have to develop this that means I have to talk to someone that is really producing and that was Trudy. Financing, up, down, the whole who-ha and then Sting.

I'd like to begin by apologizing sincerely for the offending comments that I've made. Washington Jonathan Gruber Obamacare Consultant SOT (Jonathan GruberObamacare Consultant) I'd like to begin by apologizing sincerely for the offending comments that I've made. ENDCNN.SCRIPT KEYWORD TAGS GRUBER HEALTHCARE.GOV

TAPE_NUMBER: EF01/0146 IN_TIME: 14:30:07 LENGTH: 02:24 SOURCES: APTN/VIRGIN RECORDS RESTRICTIONS: Shots 1, 3, 7 & 9 = VIRGIN RECORDS, No re-use/re-sale without clearance FEED: VARIOUS (THE ABOVE TIME-CODE IS TIME-OF-DAY) SCRIPT: xfa Title: Jonathan Wilkes Date: January 2001 Location: Dublin, Ireland They say that the entertainment business is all about who you know, and it looks like there's no exception to that rule when it comes to JONATHAN WILKES. You may not have heard his name yet, but you no doubt soon will do. With a very familiar British regional accent, and with devilish eyebrows, it comes as no surprise that Wilkes is the best friend and flatmate of none other than ROBBIE WILLIAMS. His first single "Just Another Day" is not due for release in Europe until March but APTN caught up with the young singer when he was about to get on stage at the recent Dublin Childline concert. The song was written by Eliot Kennedy, the musical genius behind such big names as the Spice Girls, Take That, Boyzone, 5ive and S Club 7, and the video features Wilkes running around a beach with a bunch of his friends - but not our Robbie. Wilkes decided to become a singer when his hopes of becoming a professional football player were dashed when he was told he wasn't good enough. So, he asked his best pal Robbie for help and it wasn't long before Wilkes was performing to record company executives who started a bidding war for the youngster. Innocent Records finally landed the deal with the young singer and now it looks as though the world is Wilkes' oyster. With not only Robbie Williams and Eliot Kennedy behind him but also songwriters Bryan Adams and Guy Chambers, it looks like the world is set for another singing superstar. SHOTLIST: 1.Clip ' Just Another Day ' 2.sot Jonathan Wilkes 3.Clip ' Just Another Day ' 4.b-roll Robbie Williams & Jonathan Wilkes at Q Awards 6.sot Jonathan Wilkes 7.clip ' Just Another Day ' 8.sot Jonathan Wilkes 9.clip 'Just Another Day' ?

Apple designer Jonathan Ive receives knighthood; EXT **Music heard SOT** Sir Jonathan Ive (Senior Vice President of Design, Apple) interview with reporter in shot SOT ENDS

NAME: UK US 20060402I TAPE: EF06/0281 IN_TIME: 10:20:18:08 DURATION: 00:04:07:06 SOURCES: ITV'S JONATHAN DIMBLEBY PROGRAMME DATELINE: Liverpool - 1 April 2006 RESTRICTIONS: Must Credit/No Library Rights MUST CREDIT "ITV1'S JONATHAN DIMBLEBY PROGRAMME" NO LIBRARY ACCESS SHOTLIST 1. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 2. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer: "Excuse me, you don't link those mistakes that you've made in any degree to the suffering today, the killing today in Iraq, you don't think if you'd done it differently we might be spared that today?" 3. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleezza Rice, US Secretary of State "Well, you know history will tell because you can never tell. And I'm enough of an historian to know that things that look like brilliant strategy in the immediate period later look like terribly mistaken or in fact really mistaken strategies." 4. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "Yeah, but we're getting the." 5. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleezza Rice, US Secretary of State: "And ones that at the time looked like mistakes later have turned out to have been exactly the right to do so I'll let history judge those things." 6. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "We have senior Iraqis talking about civil war, indeed we have the American ambassador to Iraq saying that Iraq now, and I quote him exactly 'is really vulnerable to civil war'. Do you accept what he says?" 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Secretary of State "Of course it's vulnerable when you have people like Zarqawi (Jordanian-born leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi) trying to stimulate civil war and trying to foment civil war. Of course it's vulnerable when it's had years of sectarian tension where people settle their differences by, just give me a moment, where people settle their differences either by violence or by repression and are now trying to do that by politics and by compromise but we have to look at the alternative and the alternative is that these people would continue to live in the captivity of a tyrant, that Saddam Hussein would continue to threaten his neighbours and his own people, that period is over and the Iraqis are now on a course, a very difficult course, toward a more democratic future and that's something that we should celebrate, difficult as it is, it is better than the alternative." 8. Wide of the room 9. SOUNDBITE (English) Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary "But I was, I was present in the cabinet room in Downing Street on two or three occasions at least when we had detailed discussions with the prime minister and groups of Iraqi experts about the ethnic make-up of Iraq and of course the whole history of what had happened from the time of his liberation...." 10. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, journalists "So you, so you knew there was a risk." 11. SOUNDBITE (English) Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary "Of course we knew there was risk." 12. Wide shot of the room 13. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleezza Rice, US Secretary of State "The United States very much wants to try people and get them out of Guantanamo but I'm." 14. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "But you may not be able to get them out of Guantanamo, they may stay there indefinitely" 15. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleezza Rice, US Secretary of State "Until we can try people or until we can release them to their governments we're most certainly not going to release them on the general population." 16. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "So there's, there's no, there's no time limits..." 17. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State "Well, let's remember why people are in Guantanamo." 18. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "The United States in the end does reserve from your perspective the right to take pre-emptive military action against Iran if you feel that is the only way to ensure that they comply with what you regard as the proper outcome." 19. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State "Let me be very clear and go to the bottom line. Iran is not Iraq. I know that's what's on people's minds. Iran is not Iraq. The circumstances are different, we don't have 12 years of Security Council resolutions, a case in which a state attacked its neighbour, tried to annex its neighbour, as it did with Kuwait where we were still in a state of war after the armistice of 1991. I just want to be very clear, Iran is not Iraq. However, the president of the United States doesn't take his options off the table. We are committed to a diplomatic course because we believe that a diplomatic course can work." 20. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "So when your good friend Jack Straw says it's inconceivable that military action would be taken and he cannot imagine circumstances, are you with him or are you saying: 'Hang about, we do reserve that option?" 21. SOUNDBITE (English) Jack Straw, British Foreign Affairs Secretary: "She is of a different position, a slightly different position.." 22. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State "I do have a slightly different position." 23. Wide of the room UPSOUND (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "We know that George Bush, the president, refers to his father as 41, is it true that he refers to you as 44?" 24. Close up of Rice laughing 25. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State "Well, not, not that I've heard. I'm very happy doing this and I'll be a very happy academic someday." 26. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "And you won't accept under any circumstances any nominations for the presidency? 27. SOUNDBITE (English) Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State "Jonathan, I don't know how many ways to say no. I think I've said it many times. 28. SOUNDBITE (English) Jonathan Dimbleby, interviewer "That must be very disappointing for you that she won't say yes, because you admire her so much you'd like her as president, wouldn't you?" 29. SOUNDBITE (English) Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary "That's a matter for the American people but above all for Secretary Rice." 30. Wide of the room STORYLINE US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday said in an interview to be broadcast on British television that the United States was "committed" to pursuing a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis. In an interview with ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme, recorded in Liverpool on Saturday, she acknowledged widespread concerns that the current standoff between the UN Security Council and Iran could lead to the US taking pre-emptive military action. But she stressed that "Iran is not Iraq. I know that's what's on people's minds. The circumstances are different". "I just want to be very clear, Iran is not Iraq. However, the president of the United States doesn't take his options off the table; we are committed to a diplomatic course because we believe that a diplomatic course can work," she went on to say. When questioned about recent comments made by the US ambassador to Iraq about the situation in that country, Rice said that although Iraq was "vulnerable" to civil war, the current situation it was still better than the alternative. "Of course it's vulnerable when you have people like Zarqawi trying to stimulate civil war and trying to foment civil war...but we have to look at the alternative and the alternative is that these people would continue to live in the captivity of a tyrant," she said. Rice was being interviewed together with her British counterpart, Jack Straw, who admitted that prior to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the British government had been aware of the possible threat of a spiralling religious conflict following the military intervention.

THREE TORNADOES TOUCH DOWN IN SOUTH CAROLINA.

INTERVIEW RETURNS: David Susskind Gloria, you wanted to say something. Gloria I wanted to respond to Joe when he said where is the church? Well, Joe, we are the church. And we are we have to be instrumental in bringing about these changes within the church. The church is in a period of limbo that, you know, they they don't know where this homosexuality is going to, to go. But it's very similar to what happened when Catholics who sung suddenly becoming divorced and there were hundreds and hundreds of Catholic men and women who were divorced and yet were living good Catholic lives and wanted to raise their children as Catholics. And they they brought pressure to bear where the change had come about. David Susskind The church is noticeably intolerant of homosexuals. And there's such urgent other problems that I don't think that one has immediate priority. Why don't we get to your own lives? You've come to terms with your children. Does that include their being able to bring their lovers to the house. Gloria Oh, yes. My daughter brings her friend to my house. She comes and spends weekends with us. They live out of state with my two grandchildren. So she is welcome at my home as my daughter is welcome at my home. David Susskind You reach the point where you can tell friends about your job. Amy Ashworth Yes, I do better. We have a gay phone in the house. And when the plumber comes and he goes to the phone to use it as a no that's my gay phone. And later we have wonderful Bob Benov hotline for parents of gays in her home. David Susskind Oh, you have a hotline. You work for the parents of gays and lesbians. That's correct. What do you call it? I'm about to kill my child. What do Amy Ashworth you know we get calls when Do you have your meetings? We have calls? Do you have a group, you know where we are. We have calls of people who feel troubled, and wonderful. People who who call, and then we have people who visit them, and then they come to the parents group, and then they feel so much better. Because when you go to the parents group, you're no longer alone. The stereotypes fall down, we have gay and lesbian speakers who come from every profession, all telling the same story, like our children did, that they felt different at a certain age. And they really have one choice, being honest about themselves, their own true nature of staying in the closet. Arthur David, can I answer a question you asked before? Do we do I do my wife and I include our daughter in with group affairs? In other words, my daughter brings her lover when she's invited to weddings, and they come as a couple to bar mitzvahs. They come as a couple David Susskind is that a little bit awkward? Arthur No, not at all. David Susskind Weddings above the Bob Benov that happens in my family. Arthur The reason it's not awkward, is because people are relay us do we tell relations? We don't go around? Listen, my daughter is a lesbian. But they ask questions after that, you know, we noticed that your daughter comes with the same girl all the time, and so on and so forth. And they come as a couple he said, Yes. Did they live together? Yes. Then they don't know what to ask. And they don't know what to say they're embarrassed. You never say they never asked? Is she a lesbian? They don't have to ask. And they they've known my daughter all her life. They've loved her all her life. And at this point, they say, hey, it's it seems like a very normal thing. They we don't say, Hey, your daughter or son should do that. And I don't say that. We would like that. David Susskind Did you ever taken on some Manish a characteristic Arthur not at all David Susskind dressing differently? Arthur Not at all. She's never changed the way she dressed. She's always dressed the same. And now the question is always asked in a relationship like that, whether it's two males or two females, one is dominance. And one is the macho one who other acts the part of the woman and vice versa. One is a butch and the other one that's not so they have the same problems that any normal married couple Bob Benov It's two people relating together is what it is. Arthur And another thing I must raise this point before one is the man and one is No. Bob Benov Two people, two people, David Susskind every couple I have known heterosexual and certainly homosexual. One is the leader. One is the manage one and the other is the female. Bob Benov I don't know how to people. David Susskind I just know Amy Ashworth Look at marriage. It's more shared these days. It really is where you listen to the one and and the David Susskind I'm not talking about not listening or listening. Not talking about one tends to say that well, that's just fell down. You pick it up. I mean, one is stronger, stronger. Joe We'll accept that. But that's in every relationship. Bob Benov Male and female? David Susskind Yeah. Well, what do you quibble? You say stronger. Arthur Anyway, I quibble. David, I must bring this out. Just past this. September, my wife and I celebrated our 45th anniversary. Ah, thank you. And I want a few I've lost a few and a few got rained out. In other ways. It's not a case that you always win or you always lose if you're doing your marriage never last 45 years. If it's a good relationship, it will last because life does not go on and an even plane and a one is always dominant on one is always submissive at some point, that thing has to blow out. Because you cannot destroy David Susskind You are making an immediate equation between a heterosexual marriage and a homosexual one Arthur So yeah, yes, I definitely am. Immediately, because let me say another thing as I hasn't there is more sex. That is practice and a heterosexual marriage than in a homosexual marriage. Because in many cases, it's in the homosexual groupings and follow what you will. It's a case of love. It's a case of companionship, it's a case of need, and if people are married, and the only, I mean, heterosexual marriage, and I only need is sex that matters as the last either it's human relationship and Bob Benov human relationships. That's people relating to each other on a daily basis, even talking about the family reaction. My reaction was a little bit different than author's. My son Jonathan lives in Atlanta, and he's been living with the same person for seven years now. And they have been invited to the family bar mitzvahs and they always come. They traveled from Atlanta and come up to New York for the bar mitzvah. If there's a wedding, they will be invited. And they attend together. And they're introduced not as you know, two people together. They're introduced as a couple. That's Jonathan and his mate, Lewis. That's who it is. And the family accepts it. My entire family knows it, and they accept it. And no, and there's, David Susskind you suggest, uniformly you suggest that your children, homosexual, lesbian children have single love relationships. And there is a body of literature that suggests that homosexuals tend to be promiscuous. Gloria That seems to be the image that they have no David Susskind There is scientific data about that, you know? Bob Benov Everything could be named scientific data Amy Ashworth 10% of the population of the gay population is promiscuous. 90% of the heterosexual David Susskind You just made that up? Amy Ashworth No, I think it is Amy Ashworth Bob Benov 50% of marriages dissolve. Yeah. And I would suggest that most of those two solutions require some promiscuity, or David Susskind tactic you veered away from an answer to an equivocation. I'm saying that there is a literature that suggests that homosexuals for good and sufficient reasons society given them a hard time, parents refusing to accept it, and so forth, tend to be promiscuous, have multiple affairs simultaneously. Arthur I'm a mathmatician, among amongst other things, or when I went through school, and so I took statistics both in the economics department and in the math department. And one of my professors gave a definition. And he said that statistics is the same as a bikini bathing suit. What it reveals is very interesting, but what it hides is vital. And otherwise, I'll take any set of figures and I will prove anything you want out of the same set of figures by David Susskind If your children. Live promiscuously with their males and with the women where it's alleged Bob Benov No, definitely not. none of my children have been promiscuous, not heterosexuals, and not the homosexuals. That is not to say that all of my children have lasting one on one relationships continuously. Two of my sons have lasting long term relationships. Two of them have not. And other two, one is heterosexual and homosexual. And it happens to be in both cases. So I think that the what you cited before as the statistic is, again, one of the misinterpreted things that people accept, just because they're accepting David Susskind that it's valid, but your lucky experience will come right back to you, Joe, after we pause.

JON KARL INTERVIEW WITH VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY ON THE KILLING OF OBL / OSAMA BIN LADEN. MIXED / SWITCHED ABC NEWS - WORLD NEWS WITH DIANE SAWYER "DICK CHENEY INTERVIEW" INTERVIEW WITH DICK CHENEY CORRESPONDENT: JONATHAN KARL PRODUCER: SIMMONS (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) JONATHAN KARL: 10:00:01 (approx) Mr. Vice President, thank you for taking time to talk to us on this day of all days. What went through your mind when you heard the news? DICK CHENEY: 10:00:06 Well, I first heard about it last night-- when the first press reports started coming in. You know, those of us who've been involved over the years in the counterterrorism program and dealing with 9/11 and so forth so of-- capturing Osama bin Laden was the ultimate goal. The ultimate objective. It doesn't solve all the problems by any means, but it's clearly been a priority for the last two administrations. And I think like most Americans I felt a great sense of satisfaction when I found out that we'd in fact captured and killed him. JONATHAN KARL: 10:00:41 Did you think about all those that have dedicated their lives to this? I mean obviously to this and the larger war on terror, but this? DICK CHENEY: 10:00:49 Well-- this, but it's-- it's-- I thought about the-- literally thousands of-- young Americans who put their lives on the line. Some of 'em even as we speak here today. But-- and-- and who've sacrificed everything in-- Afghanistan and Iraq-- in the pursuit of the safety and security and freedom of the American people. 10:01:17 And it's very hard to not think about them when you think about something like this. It's not just Bin Laden or just those that are involved in the counterterrorism effort. We've gotta cast the net broader than that. But I think it's a-- very special tribute that we all owe to the bravery and courage of the men and women in the intelligence and military business who performed so well to finally get it done. 10:01:44 It's taken a long time. They never gave up. They never backed off. They just kept pluggin' along until they got it right. And it also looks, at least on a preliminary basis, based on press accounts, that a lot of the things that we did early on fed into this ultimate success. And I think that means positive things too about the overall policy approach. JONATHAN KARL: 10:02:06 Have you spoken to President Bush about it? DICK CHENEY: 10:02:11 I have not. Not yet. Talked to Steve Adler this morning but I-- I expect to talk to President Bush about it too. JONATHAN KARL: 10:02:18 You heard I'm sure the President say last night that one of the first things he did was bring Leon Panetta in and tell him to make the capture or killing of Bin Laden the top priority. Does the President deserve credit? DICK CHENEY: 10:02:30 Well, I think the administration clearly deserves credit for the success of the operation. If you look at it from the perspective of the President, he's gotta make the basic judgment to tell the force to go execute. In this case the raid. And-- wrestle with deciding, you know, is this good enough intelligence. Can we act on it? And from what I can tell it looks to me like you know, we all owe him the same sense of satisfaction that I'm sure they feel. JONATHAN KARL: Was that a change though, making Bin Laden the top priority? DICK CHENEY: 10:03:08 No, I don't think it was a change. I think it'd been a top priority since-- well, even before 9/11. Certainly was since 9/11, after 9/11 for-- the Bush administration. And-- I'm sure it was for the Obama administration as well too. JONATHAN KARL: We're also hearing that a key piece of intelligence very early on came out of the interrogation program, the CIA's interrogation program: The nom de guerre of the courier. DICK CHENEY: Right. JONATHAN KARL: Some reports have it coming from KSM. You know, that interrogation program that is now defunct. DICK CHENEY: 10:03:44 Well, it's an enhanced interrogation program that we put in place back in our first term. And I don't know the details. All I know is what I've seen in the newspaper at this point, but it wouldn't be surprising if in fact that program produced results that ultimately contributed to the success of this venture. 10:04:09 But it's a-- I think important to look at this as a continuum. I mean it's not just on one day you get up, bang, and you got Osama bin Laden. It's the kind of thing where an awful lot of people over a long period of time, thousands have worked this case and worked these issues and followed up on the leads and captured bad guys and interrogated them and so forth. 10:04:34 So I think it could be looked upon as a collective effort by our military and intelligence personnel-- and by a lot of our civilian leaders. And in the final analysis we demonstrated conclusively that the American government takes very seriously our responsible to bring justice, if you will, or to bring to justice somebody like Bin Laden who's committed this terrible outrage, killing-- 3,000 Americans on 9/11. 10:05:06 And I think the way for us to think about it is-- is to think about it as part of a collective effort. It started in the Clinton administration, was carried forward very aggressively in the Bush administration and now the Obama administration with the-- the results that we're all very pleased to see today. JONATHAN KARL: 10:05:25 Where-- where the goal has never, never changed in terms of the ultimate goal-- DICK CHENEY: I think that's-- JONATHAN KARL: --being al Qaeda. Getting Bin Laden? DICK CHENEY: 10:05:32 You can talk about, you know, how you state the goal. We always thought about in terms of defending the nation successfully for the seven and a half years after 9/11 for preventing any further mass casualty attacks. And at the heart of that effort, obviously, was goin' after Bin Laden. AndI think that's-- I think everybody had the same basic ultimately objective. JONATHAN KARL: Did you ever get close? Did you ever think you were almost there? That you were gonna get him? DICK CHENEY: 10:05:59 I can't say that. I mean, you know, you-- you work it so hard, day in and day out. You get reports. Some of which turned out not to be true. But ultimately, you know, what happened was is what needed to happen. You had success plowed on success plowed on success that ultimately led to his capture. JONATHAN KARL: And are we safe for now? DICK CHENEY: I think so. (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) DICK CHENEY: But it's a kind of situation where we need to preserve our sense of vigilance, if you will. It'd be a big mistake for us now to assume, "There. That's taken care of. It's all over with." Al Qaeda's a big organization and they're very active now in the Arabian peninsula down in Yemen. There's every reason to believe there'll be further attacks attempted against the United States. And for us to spend so much time patting ourselves on the back because we got Bin Laden that we miss the next attack would be a terrible tragedy. We need to stay just as vigilant as we have been. We need to continue to emplace those policies that produced the intelligence that we needed in order to be able to successfully complete this mission. JONATHAN KARL: 10:07:17 All right, Mr. Vice President. Great to see you in New York and great to-- DICK CHENEY: Great to-- JONATHAN KARL: --see you-- DICK CHENEY: --see you. JONATHAN KARL: --(UNINTEL) about and thank you so much for your time. DICK CHENEY: Thank you. (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) * * *END OF AUDIO* * * * * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * * ---------------------------------------------------------------

GOLFER SAVES DROWNING KID.

RETURN TO INTERVIEW: Robert Lipsyte: In talking about New York as a great subject for literature. Do you think Bonfire of the Vanities got it right? Alfred Kazin: It got it right, but mixed in with an awful lot of scorn and hatred for the poor populace. Tom Wolfe is a is a southern Confederate. And I think of that book as the Confederacy's one victory especially in New York. You know, Wolfe comes from Richmond, and he has a good solid wasp background. The book is very charming, very brilliantly done, but it's journalism, because he's dealing with types all the time, and then it hasn't escaped me that the one who comes out of the end, as the one innocent victim of everybody else is of course, this miserable wasp, who was originally shown as an adulterer and all sorts of types of crap. But nevertheless, he's perceived as being slightly more innocent than the others you know. it's a wicked book in both sense the of the word wicked. Robert Lipsyte: The problem, of course, is that that is the picture of New York that is being offered now to the country and the world. Alfred Hazan: Exactly. Robert Lipsyte: And it's not your picture of New York, Alfred Kazin: certainly not, certainly not. there were things in it because it made me laugh, but also it made me very mad. Sample the picture has, you know, it's as if Jonathan Swift, instead of writing Gulliver's Travels had written had written about the blacks and the Jews in the Bronx. That scene in which the Jewish judge is holding on to the back of the doors of black Maria, and the black friends inside, they are cursing each other and the violence, racial epithets. That's New York, according to Mr. Wolf. I don't think it is the real story of New York. There is there is still more feeling between people between the different types. But of course, New York is like Austria Hungary before the First World War, you know, with Koch, of course, as the Emperor Franz Yosef, God help us. You know, it does have this fantastic lineup of nations, of languages, of tribes. I have had experiences in New York with people. Do you know that I've been driven by taxi by an Eskimo from Alaska, by Hassad wearing the full regalia, for example, and who scared all the other taxi drivers whenever they looked at him. In fact, one while we were waiting for red light was so frightened, he went right through the red light. And in one way or another, you know, there is that incredible.. What bothers me about New York is that not only do I not know what language is being spoken in the subway, I don't know which language it is you see and that bothers me. I should like to think that, you know, it's something I might possibly get some more knowledge of, but it's out there. Robert Lipsyte: Do you think that, do you feel it's slipping out of your grasp? Alfred Kazin: definitely. I mean, I mean, I put it very simply. It's the kind of thing which only very tough, very cynical people like Tom Wolfe can really do justice to it. And it's no accident, that Wolfe's book sold tremendously you see. I mean, the fact is that New York does not, I mean who wrote about New York with love. It was O'Henry. It was even F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby. It was Nathaniel West. It was um well, Saul Bellow. It was Bernard Malamud. It was Richard Wright, even, it was most of all it was Ralph Ellison. But these people you see were writing about New York as a human thing, where people like Wolfe write about it as a sociological problem. And then of course, they talk about themselves as Balzac, you see, and they want everybody to be like themselves. Well, that's just nonsense. Alfred Kazin: What I miss about New York, frankly, more than anything else, is the lack of fraternity between the different tribes or different countries, different languages, that's something I'm not used to. In the old days, where I grew up, it was a matter of course, you know, the Italians and the Greeks, and the Russians, outside my Jewish neighborhood, we were all very much aware of each other, because we had all come over at the same time, so to speak, or rather, our parents or grandparents had, and we all recognized ourselves as children of the poor. And there was no, nothing demeaning about that at all on the contrary. Robert Lipsyte: let me let me read another line of yours that that really struck me. "The city arouses us with energy, by which it exhausts us". "here's almost something sexual in that, and also a sense of completion and defeat. Ultimately, the city uses us often." Alfred Kazin: It's perfectly true. INew York is, of course, after Paris, the sexiest city in the world, sex is always in the air. But in Paris, it means a love affair. Here, it means that one night stands as far as I'm concerned. It's something brutal and hurried about the whole thing here. But the energy is fantastic. During the war in England, I used to be told by Englishman who lived in New York, that they needed less sleep than anywhere else. And I said, and you get less sleep, they don't you? And they said we certainly do. New York is a capital of insomnia. But one way or another, that energy flows through the streets, you realize it, every time I come back, I realize I'm galvanized everybody has as luckily people walk, for example, down 42nd Street, pushing others out of the way. Even though the schedule like everybody's schedule is a very important thing. We all know that. There's a kind of desperation and getting to the thing as such, you know, this morning, the subway example, I watched a woman being pushed out by another woman by another woman, who said, very simply get out of my way. And that might say, could be the slogan for a great deal of New York living these days. Get out of my way out of my way. Robert Lipsyte 24:43 Would you read something for me? It's on page 219. Something else? Alfred Kazin: Well, thank you for knowing my books. Oh, well, you know, the page number. In New York retain so much of the world's tragedies is endless displacements and tragedies, yet no one walking in streets with attention. You can miss some very deep grooves of the human experience as the century of lay gaze on Shin rumbles to within. So it's exciting to be a writer here, as it is fruitful for an artist photographer to keep his eyes open. The subject never lets you off. There is so much humanity packed up in the streets so much friction, so much idiocy. So much learning artistry, appetite for living. So much crime with so much love making so much eating and drinking on the street. That is not altogether in human to shut our ears to the screams we hear in the night. Too much we say it as much of the time or too much" Robert Lipsyte: Thank you so very much. That's the Eleventh hour. I'm Robert Lipsyte.

Apple designer Jonathan Ive receives knighthood; ENGLAND: London: Royal Academy of Arts: EXT Ive interview with reporter in shot SOT Rob Brydon (Comedian) and Richard E. Grant (Actor) with others / Reporter to camera

INSERT INTERVIEW Robert Lipsyte 21:30 in the essay that we've just heard, and in the fair report, is that after the taxpayers pay for the hardware of PBS, its corporate sponsors who decide what's actually going on the air. Is that fair? Barry Chase 21:47 No, it's not fair. The and in fact, much of what is on the air is paid for by the public as well. Though there is in an underfunded system, the possibility and no doubt some reality to this, that that those who choose to support particular programs will pick and choose from among a full range of program options. And we'll pick those that they think make the most sense for whatever their own sensibilities are. So that I, there was a concern here, I think, Pat, there's some food for thought and what Pat has to say as there is in the in the fair report, because the we have known for a long time that with what she calls a jerry rigged system, we are more subject than we like to be to the picking and choosing a program funders, for pieces of the schedule. I don't I don't think that it's necessarily relevant to the to the MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour, which is, after all, a news program with an orientation toward the kind of decision making that Robin described. And by the way, Pat also left out some other very important things we've done such as the African series, which was the the first and only series on television done about Africa from an African perspective in which caused a certain amount of consternation among the power elite. But the point still is, there is something to the point, that if the public wishes to have a system of public television service that reflects the public's views fairly, then the public should pay for more of that system than it does at present. I think there's no question about it. And I think with a multicultural public, there will be an increasing tendency toward a multicultural Public Television. Robert Lipsyte 23:28 Carolyn Craven, is it more than a than Barry Chase's concern? I mean, is it systemic kind of either safe or conservative? Carolyn Craven 23:37 It is safe, I think it is conservative, and I think it is systemic on South Africa Now, the program of that, that I represent on public television has no corporate underwriting at all, and that we were considered corporate unfriendly, because that the show is considered to have an anti apartheid bias, and so therefore, was corporate unfriendly for corporations. I don't even know what that means. Does that mean they support apartheid? I've never even I've never even understood what that meant, in terms of a South African context. But it's more than that, Oh, you look at public television, and you can look at it hour after hour, day after day. And yes, the Africa series was wonderful. And yes, eyes on the prize is terrific. But they are really exceptions, rather than the rule of one just pays attention to the hours, a white male conservative. Influence is just clearly there. I think that and I know in news programs that when it comes to calling an expert on an issue, you call the people that, you know, well, when most of the people who run these shows are white males, they're going to call other white males whom they know and more. I don't think it's nonsense. And I think that it not only happens, but it's even more than that, even when women or minorities are called in. For example, blacks are called in to discuss issues that either predominantly affect blacks in this country or that effect Affrica, you know, as though we have no opinions on the environment or about China or about Central Europe or Central America, Eastern Europe. You know, I'd love to comment on all those subjects and can have, you know, and have informed opinions on all those subjects. But that, that even when we were called in, were called in to represent such a narrow focus as though you know, as the blacks only concern. Concerns are about what other blacks are doing, either in this country or abroad. And that's truly offensive. Robert Lipsyte 25:36 That's just the ghettoizing. Carolyn Craven 25:39 It's a real ghettoizing Robert MacNeil 25:42 Well, I'm, I'm offended by the implication, in those northern implication, it's a charge in the essay, because they have images from our program, that none of the issues that the woman Aufderheidi raises. none of the questions raised are discussed, I'm just defending our program. Now, PBS has a very wide range of programs, I'm discussing our program, all of the concerns and issues that she raised have been discussed and often discussed more than once, in our program, for instance, the question of worker safety and safety from pesticides and people in the field, the safety of people working on oil rigs have been have been featured on our program, you have to look at the program as a whole. And I, I'm not going to sit here and tolerate the implication that we only reflect a small corporate white American middle class Carolyn Craven 26:35 I think you do tend to try to reflect a consensus and You said so yourself earlier on, and that, that it seems to me that news programs also Robert MacNeil 26:44 reflect a consensus. I said that in the case of Nicaragua at a particular time, when the issue had changed in Washington, and after after there being no consensus for a long time. The as a result of the of the intervention by the five American presidents bitterly opposed by the Reagan administration, tolerated by the Bush administration. The the two parties on Capitol Hill had come together, our program reflected that during that, Jeff Cohen 27:11 why can't you have a critic of that consensus? What is so difficult Carolyn Craven 27:16 news programs are a part of the public debate and not just a reflection when Washington happens to have a consensus. And that what is it seems to me that, that what you fail to do is to is to be a part of the much broader debate. It's as though the spectrum is this wide, and you represent some kind of narrow or reflect some kind of narrow, Robert Lipsyte 27:35 Barry Chase in Washington is Is there some way that PBS, which we know is not a network, as we know, commercial networks are can get back to this diversity or wholeness? That was the original mandate? Barry Chase 27:51 Well, I think there were a lot of original mandates. I think there were about as many original mandates as there were people thinking about public television originally. One of them certainly, though, is the reflection of voices outside of the existing consensus that's in our program policies. We try hard to do that. I think that the jerry rigged nature of the of the funding for the system, the sort of each time being its own new creation, as far as funding programs, causes certain distortions. And I think that we try to be sensitive toward complementing those, those problems when we, when we fund things from within the system itself. I think that we, for example, we very much are aware of the multiculturalism of the country and have a sort of new opportunity to reflect that multiculturalism in our programs. I think that to do that in the most effective manner. We're going to have to have more control within public television itself, of the funding for new program ventures, etc. This is not not not with regard to the MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour, which has a particular news program mission, which is a journalistic mission, that's a bit different, I think, from what Ms. Craven and Mr. Cohen are talking about. I think, though, that there is an opportunity to become more multicultural. I think there's a lag time in these things. So you're likely to see more Eurocentric kinds of discussions than perhaps there ought to be given a walk down the streets of major American cities. But I do think we're conscious of it. I do think that there's a new sensibility in public television. And with some new resources for us, I think we can do something about it. Jeff Cohen 29:23 I've been hearing about, I've been hearing that kind of statement for so many years now, Carolyn Craven 29:27 most of these ethnic groups have existed in this country for a very long time, much longer than the existence of PBS. And yet PBS continually and conceptually refuses to reflect that. Let me just say that it's not only a racial and cultural bias, but it's also a class bias. I mean, there's virtually nothing on the air that reflects the fact that there's a large working class and underclass in our country Robert MacNeil 29:51 Not true in our program, and I'm not sure I'm not talking about that and PBS first thought he made the statement at the MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour, Good, you might almost think that workers don't exist. It's true. It is it is not true. Jeff Cohen 30:04 We have the statistics vary, and you had 6% of your guests represented either ethnic groups, public interest groups or labor unions Barry Chase 30:14 PBS has been criticized broadly, I'd like to get one more word. And if I could, I think that I think perhaps the most successful multicultural program on the air today is Sesame Street. And it's been there for about 20 years. Now you can, I suppose, sneer if you like at the faculty, Carolyn Craven 30:29 No body is sneering. Congratuations and it's Wonderful, Barry Chase 30:32 thank you very much. Hold on for a minute. I think that Sesame Street's success with a multicultural approach to children is terribly important. And the influence of that program is very difficult to put limits on since we're dealing with mines that are relatively open and relatively unformed. I do I wouldn't disagree for a moment that we want to make better efforts. I think, Carolyn, for you to say or for Jeff to say you've been hearing this for 100 years, and therefore you don't believe it? Well, you know, I don't know how to deal with that except to say that we are sensitive to it. I think there's a new sensibility to it. I think that there's there's a new sensibility to it in the in the country as a whole. You may say these groups have been here for a long time. And and certainly they have been in one form or another and one population segment or another. But I think that there has been a watershed in sense of sensitivity and sensibility in this country over the past five to 10 years, even as we're having terrible problems. racially, we know in some of the large cities, there's a new comfort with the multiculturalism. And I think you will see that reflected, Jeff Cohen 31:29 let me ask you a specific question, because it was one that I was invited to Washington to meet your programming board, when you had hearings in February 1987. And nothing has changed that I can see. We asked you back then fair petitioned you. And we said that you have every week, you have regular programs that give the corporate view of things. So they look at the corporate agenda. Louis Rukeyser is Wall Street week, the Nightly Business Report is on most PBS stations, Adam Smith's money world and we made a simple request. How hard is it to every week, have a program for the public interest constituencies those that sometimes conflict with big business, labor, consumer rights, environmentalism? And we asked you the second question about all the programs hosted by the McLaughlin and the Buckley's on the right, how hard is it to get a show hosted by a partisan journalist of the left? Barry Chase 32:24 Well, let me say first of all, we have tried and we have had one, in fact, the kwitny report, which was on for one season, I think, was generally regarded as a as a program that was hosted by a journalist of the left. And we'll continue to try that Robert Lipsyte 32:36 Barry, hold that thought. what happened to the kwitny report? Barry Chase 32:40 it was a combination of a loss of of comity between the station that was presenting it to us, which was another station in New York City, and kwitny On the one hand, and Robert Lipsyte 32:52 It wasn't a matter of loss of sponsorship and they kwitny never got a corporate sponsor. Barry Chase 32:58 That's correct. And that and that is that is the fact Robert Lipsyte 33:00 Let me ask I'd like to ask Robert McNeil something not about the MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour, but about PBS in general. Do you have any concern about the what seems to be the overwhelming corporate sponsorship in in PBS? And what might be the response to that Robert MacNeil 33:17 Barry Chase is absolutely right as more of the primetime are the regular programming, a larger proportion of the regular programming on the public system is supported by corporate underwriting, there will be fewer programs which corporate underwriters disapprove of. That's true. But there are lots of programs on the corporate underwriters don't choose to underwrite you remember, you mentioned South Africa now front line, which is the only program at the moment anywhere on any network where you get regular what used to be called in the business hard hitting documentaries, which certainly reflect the diversity of opinion everywhere, and which is a stellar program. Jeff Cohen 33:54 Why can't we get that day after day week after week Robert MacNeil 33:57 Well you get TV you and I just wanted to complete my point it is not does not attract corporate underwriting yet it is supported by the public television stations to hear you people talk and the essays from American University. You'd think that all public affairs programming get their support solely from underwriters. It is not true. The news our it is not true of most others. They get a combination of support and public television stations choose to support these programs by the money that they collect from their viewers and so on. Jeff Cohen 34:24 Well, my argument would be that the public TV programmers have got to do something to balance out the undue influence and weight that corporate funders have a good example is Bill Buckley show he's been on for decades. He's funded by big business Mobil Oil is one of his backers. And he wants according to reports in the LA Times, gave $30,000 to a politician he supported Jack Kemp to come on his program twice. Well, if Bill Buckley has got $30,000 to pay somebody to come on his program twice And Jonathan kwitny show a hard hitting show goes off the air for lack of funding. There's something happening at the top of PBS that Barry Chase isn't putting into order Robert MacNeil 35:08 It isn't only the top of PBS stead programs. All programs have to be approved once a year by the collectivity of public television stations who are independent it was not a network. However, some people might have wondered network perhaps I myself, one might have wondered network it was set up to make the individual stations autonomous, and they decide which programs they will buy by Jeff Cohen 35:29 now, it's a good point. And that's why John McLaughlin, who's had General Electric behind a Metropolitan Life, ADM, his programs are offered free to public TV stations across the country. And they take it. And so you have corporations Carolyn Craven 35:43 And they're charged more. Stations are charged for my Robert Lipsyte 35:47 Let me aks Barry Chase, with with less contributions now from state and the federal government and corporations in picking and choosing what kind of future is there for change in PBS. And especially since a lot of other places now are doing what PBS was charged to do? There's real competition Barry Chase 36:05 Yes well. That's a that's a broader question than the one raised I think, by the Fair report, but the there are things that that a market based broadcast programming source is never going to do that PBS is going to continue to do and public service education matters. Also innovation that I think is not going to be attempted by the the A and E's and the Bravo's and the Discovery Channels, no matter what happens, because they're market based and they need to have a bottom line driven kind of system. I think that the the best source of funding for us and we've known it for a long time, or the viewers have programs like this, the viewers of channel 13 In New York, are the viewers of all the other stations around the country. Without their support, we are going to be relatively less free to make the changes that Jeff Jeff feels that I should have already made. And I don't necessarily disagree, I think with with with more freedom at the center and with more resources and I think we will be getting that we're reorganizing our own work almost even as we speak here and should have a new system of program funding of at least program funding of a for about a third of the schedule in place by about a year from now. Once that happens, I think it will be more fair to hold me and Jennifer Lawson who's who's my boss accountable for the for the programs that come out the other. Robert Lipsyte 37:21 We're going to do it Barry but we're going to have to stop now and we will be back to hold you accountable. Barry chase in Washington, Carolyn Craven, Jeff Cohen, Robert MacNeil, thanks so very much for being with us. Keep watching and we'll see what changes in the future. That's the 11th hour I'm Robert Lipsyte

18 MONTH OLD SURVIVES FALL FROM APARTMENT ON TOP OF A CHOCOLATE FACTORY.

JON KARL INTERVIEW WITH VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY ON THE KILLING OF OBL / OSAMA BIN LADEN. ISOLATED CAMERA ON CHENEY. ABC NEWS - WORLD NEWS WITH DIANE SAWYER "DICK CHENEY INTERVIEW" INTERVIEW WITH DICK CHENEY CORRESPONDENT: JONATHAN KARL PRODUCER: SIMMONS (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) JONATHAN KARL: 14:13:08 (approx) Mr. Vice President, thank you for taking time to talk to us on this day of all days. What went through your mind when you heard the news? DICK CHENEY: 14:13:13 Well, I first heard about it last night-- when the first press reports started coming in. You know, those of us who've been involved over the years in the counterterrorism program and dealing with 9/11 and so forth so of-- capturing Osama bin Laden was the ultimate goal. The ultimate objective. It doesn't solve all the problems by any means, but it's clearly been a priority for the last two administrations. And I think like most Americans I felt a great sense of satisfaction when I found out that we'd in fact captured and killed him. JONATHAN KARL: 14:13:48 Did you think about all those that have dedicated their lives to this? I mean obviously to this and the larger war on terror, but this? DICK CHENEY: 14:13:56 Well-- this, but it's-- it's-- I thought about the-- literally thousands of-- young Americans who put their lives on the line. Some of 'em even as we speak here today. But-- and-- and who've sacrificed everything in-- Afghanistan and Iraq-- in the pursuit of the safety and security and freedom of the American people. 14:14:24 And it's very hard to not think about them when you think about something like this. It's not just Bin Laden or just those that are involved in the counterterrorism effort. We've gotta cast the net broader than that. But I think it's a-- very special tribute that we all owe to the bravery and courage of the men and women in the intelligence and military business who performed so well to finally get it done. 14:14:51 It's taken a long time. They never gave up. They never backed off. They just kept pluggin' along until they got it right. And it also looks, at least on a preliminary basis, based on press accounts, that a lot of the things that we did early on fed into this ultimate success. And I think that means positive things too about the overall policy approach. JONATHAN KARL: 14:15:13 Have you spoken to President Bush about it? DICK CHENEY: 14:15:18 I have not. Not yet. Talked to Steve Adler this morning but I-- I expect to talk to President Bush about it too. JONATHAN KARL: 14:15:25 You heard I'm sure the President say last night that one of the first things he did was bring Leon Panetta in and tell him to make the capture or killing of Bin Laden the top priority. Does the President deserve credit? DICK CHENEY: 14:15:37 Well, I think the administration clearly deserves credit for the success of the operation. If you look at it from the perspective of the President, he's gotta make the basic judgment to tell the force to go execute. In this case the raid. And-- wrestle with deciding, you know, is this good enough intelligence. Can we act on it? And from what I can tell it looks to me like you know, we all owe him the same sense of satisfaction that I'm sure they feel. JONATHAN KARL: Was that a change though, making Bin Laden the top priority? DICK CHENEY: 14:16:15 No, I don't think it was a change. I think it'd been a top priority since-- well, even before 9/11. Certainly was since 9/11, after 9/11 for-- the Bush administration. And-- I'm sure it was for the Obama administration as well too. JONATHAN KARL: We're also hearing that a key piece of intelligence very early on came out of the interrogation program, the CIA's interrogation program: The nom de guerre of the courier. DICK CHENEY: Right. JONATHAN KARL: Some reports have it coming from KSM. You know, that interrogation program that is now defunct. DICK CHENEY: 14:16:51 Well, it's an enhanced interrogation program that we put in place back in our first term. And I don't know the details. All I know is what I've seen in the newspaper at this point, but it wouldn't be surprising if in fact that program produced results that ultimately contributed to the success of this venture. 14:17:16 But it's a-- I think important to look at this as a continuum. I mean it's not just on one day you get up, bang, and you got Osama bin Laden. It's the kind of thing where an awful lot of people over a long period of time, thousands have worked this case and worked these issues and followed up on the leads and captured bad guys and interrogated them and so forth. 14:17:41 So I think it could be looked upon as a collective effort by our military and intelligence personnel-- and by a lot of our civilian leaders. And in the final analysis we demonstrated conclusively that the American government takes very seriously our responsible to bring justice, if you will, or to bring to justice somebody like Bin Laden who's committed this terrible outrage, killing-- 3,000 Americans on 9/11. 14:18:13 And I think the way for us to think about it is-- is to think about it as part of a collective effort. It started in the Clinton administration, was carried forward very aggressively in the Bush administration and now the Obama administration with the-- the results that we're all very pleased to see today. JONATHAN KARL: 14:18:32 Where-- where the goal has never, never changed in terms of the ultimate goal-- DICK CHENEY: I think that's-- JONATHAN KARL: --being al Qaeda. Getting Bin Laden? DICK CHENEY: 14:18:39 You can talk about, you know, how you state the goal. We always thought about in terms of defending the nation successfully for the seven and a half years after 9/11 for preventing any further mass casualty attacks. And at the heart of that effort, obviously, was goin' after Bin Laden. AndI think that's-- I think everybody had the same basic ultimately objective. JONATHAN KARL: Did you ever get close? Did you ever think you were almost there? That you were gonna get him? DICK CHENEY: 14:19:06 I can't say that. I mean, you know, you-- you work it so hard, day in and day out. You get reports. Some of which turned out not to be true. But ultimately, you know, what happened was is what needed to happen. You had success plowed on success plowed on success that ultimately led to his capture. JONATHAN KARL: And are we safe for now? DICK CHENEY: I think so. (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) DICK CHENEY: But it's a kind of situation where we need to preserve our sense of vigilance, if you will. It'd be a big mistake for us now to assume, "There. That's taken care of. It's all over with." Al Qaeda's a big organization and they're very active now in the Arabian peninsula down in Yemen. There's every reason to believe there'll be further attacks attempted against the United States. And for us to spend so much time patting ourselves on the back because we got Bin Laden that we miss the next attack would be a terrible tragedy. We need to stay just as vigilant as we have been. We need to continue to emplace those policies that produced the intelligence that we needed in order to be able to successfully complete this mission. JONATHAN KARL: 14:20:24 All right, Mr. Vice President. Great to see you in New York and great to-- DICK CHENEY: Great to-- JONATHAN KARL: --see you-- DICK CHENEY: --see you. JONATHAN KARL: --(UNINTEL) about and thank you so much for your time. DICK CHENEY: Thank you. (OFF-MIC CONVERSATION) * * *END OF AUDIO* * * * * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * * ---------------------------------------------------------------

**SEE JL-68WE FOR MORE INFORMATION**\n\n --SUPERS--\nWednesday\nFairfield, CA\n\nKrishna Abrams\nSolano County District Attorney \n\n --SOT--\nKrishna Abrams/Solano County District Attorney : "I've been doing this a long time, I've been a prosecutor for 22 years - I don't know that I've ever seen a case with such overwhelming evidence of mental, emotional, and physical abuse of so many children by the hands of their own parents."\n//butted//\n"Um, the torture we believe was for sadistic purposes."\n -----END-----\n\n --KEYWORD TAGS--\nCALIFORNIA MOTHER INA ROGERS NEGLECT ABUSE FATHER JONATHAN ALLEN\n

Apple designer Jonathan Ive receives knighthood; Royal Academy of Arts: INT Ive speech as Queen Elizabeth II (wearing white and silver dress) stands nearby SOT - I am the product of a very British design education

<p><pi /></p>\n<p><pi><b>This package/segment contains third party material. Unless otherwise noted, this material may only be used within this package/segment.</b></pi></p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>--SUPERS</b>--</p>\n<p>Friday </p>\n<p>Wolcottville, IN</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Jonathan Newell</p>\n<p>grieving father </p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>--VIDEO SHOWS</b>--</p>\n<p>sound with father, pics of girls from GoFundme, memorial with flowers and stuffed animals outside home</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>--</b><b>SCRIPT PROVIDED BY AFFILIATE</b>--</p>\n<p>Jonathan Newell - grieving father </p>\n<p>This is really the last thing I get to do for them. You know, is to honor and respect them and give them a burial with dignity. And Im going to do it no matter what, you know. But Ive had a lot of help, and I appreciate everyone, and Im going to sit down and Im gonna write everybody who donated on the GoFundMe a thank you, </p>\n<p>WITHIN TWELVE HOURS OF PUTTING UP THE GO FUND ME THE 30 THOUSAND DOLLAR GOAL WAS MET JONATHAN SAYING HE CANNOT DESCRIBE HIS THANKFULNESS FOR THE KINDNESS OF STRANGERS </p>\n<p>Jonathan Newell - grieving father </p>\n<p>People who didn't even know me or my kids started just giving money. So, and sending messages, I was reading the messages, </p>\n<p>JUST DAYS INTO HIS GRIEF JONATHAN IS FIGURING OUT HOW TO NAVIGATE THIS TRAGEDY </p>\n<p>Jonathan Newell - grieving father </p>\n<p>Sometimes you're mad, sometimes you're sad, other times youre so disassociated you don't even feel like you're there. Theres times today where I felt like the kids are just still over at their moms house, they're just right down the road, all Ive got to do is drive up there, </p>\n<p>JONATHAN WANTED TO LEAVE ONE VERY IMPORTANT MESSAGE WITH OUR VIEWERS HE SAYS IF YOU OR SOMEONE YOU KNOW IS STRUGGLING WITH MENTAL HEALTH GET THE HELP YOU NEED</p>\n<p>Jonathan Newell - grieving father </p>\n<p>And if you are a parent and you have kids, and you need help get it, because you don't when its going to be the last time that you can,</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>--KEYWORD TAGS--</b></p>\n<p>INDIANA TRAGEDY DEATH CHILDREN GOFUNDME FAMILY </p>