Interested in protecting the state department than protecting the state department is. More interested in protecting the fbi than the fbi is. Director petraeus wanted more information about warnings in there. That does not make sense to me, can you explain the motivation . If you look at what i took out, the vast majority is information related to warnings. Said earlier, i thought it inappropriate for the cia to say publicly that we warned of an attack coming. We also had him there that we had sent a warning cable to see no relevance of sending a warning cable to cairo to what happened in benghazi. As a way forthis cia to pound its chest and say look, we warned. Therefore allaying all the blame on the state department. I did not think that appropriate. I thought there would be plenty of time to have a conversation whot what was warned and responded and how. I did not think that discussion should start publicly, that was the judgment i made at a time. One other sentence, the wide availa
All the data as creepy as it sounds, is being accumulated. There is different ways to bundle it and look at anomalies and trends. It gives us information that we used to have. The Atlanta Public School story started out as a discovery that test scores had dramatically turned around in a short time. Data allowed us to discover it was statistically impossible for that to happen. That was what the team uncovered. Putting those scores together paint a picture that was impossible. They had dated different from data different from the data of others that you recall. I would Say Something about families. The Sulzberger Family owns the New York Times. Those families have maintained their commitment to quality. That is an exception in an america today. So many families, for many reasons, tax reasons, sold their companies. Thank god for the sulzbergers and the coxs. I cant tell you how many few owners would make the statement that alex just made. We understand the role of the watchdog in our new